Windows Longhorn Screenshots Available Online

The Fred writes "I found this website that seems to have screenshots for the next version of windows. Everything from a new start button, extended task bar, display options, .NET capability, and a bigger clock." Fair number of UI changes, some good, mostly irrelevant, but it's interesting. Wonder if it's real.

Comments

Re:Meh

[Ponty]

Why isn't it important? Because you think it's inefficient?

Anyhow, I think it's amazing how much _more_ like Mac OS X this looks than XP. And it's even more impressive that even though it looks _more_ like Mac OS X, it has more of the awful aspects that are further evidence that MS just doesn't get what it is that makes people like Mac OS X. At least that's how I see it.

All of these god-awful directories as web pages, wizards, and other strange abstractions to keep the user away from his computer will only serve to confuse him all the more when it comes time to fix something or take action that isn't already anticipated by the software designer. It should be easy to use the computer, not easy to use the interface abstraction. That's what MS just doesn't get, and it's why Windows will always be frustrating and always work in unexpected ways.

Hook, line and sinker

[IamTheRealMike]

Come on people, wake up! Since when do MS leak betas that last a year? I remember the same thing happening with Windows XP, a truckload of faked screenshots, some obvious, some not. The XML Control Panel was a beauty.

A few things that are clearly out of whack here - some of the screenshots have inconsistent antialiasing of text for one, which often happens when screenshots are photoshopped. The artwork is hilarious, some of the title bars have gradients but the minimize/close/restore boxes don't, making them stick out like a sore thumb.

Why are the hard disk sizes measured in KB when everything else in Windows is megabytes? Why does some of the text overlap the borders of the containing window (an api impossibility). The last screenshot is just taking the piss totally, this version of Windows won't install on that version of DOS? That's not even trying to be real.

Look, guys, if you want screenshots of cool new features that you know are genuine, look at the stuff the Linux teams post - if they're real you can get them soon, if they're faked they always tell you. This kind of slobbering over crude mockups gives Microsoft a bad name.

Re:Hook, line and sinker

[IamTheRealMike]

If this were true then why would Microsoft have fake pictures of a fake OS removed from multiple websites?

Good question, one I can only speculate on. Presumably because if people see them they may assume they're genuine and go around talking about them, with the end result that people have different expectations as to what it should be like.

Customer A: "Hey, where's that groovy horny clock thing that I saw a year or two ago gone? Bring back my clock Microsoft"

Microsoft: "Er, what clock?"

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Fake

[Dynedain]

and early screenshots of WinXP looked like Win2k with minor 'photoshop tweaks'

and early screenshots of ME looked like 98
and early screenshots of 98 looked like 95

Your point isn't one.

Of course early longhorn screenshots are going to look like XP. They take a stable version of their product and work from there. Plus they just invested heavily in this new look and feel that sets XP apart from 2k, and the previous 95/98/NT. They aren't going to abandon it that quickly.

Linux Zealots are Bill Gates Best Friend

[Ilan Volow]

It's called a double standard. Kernel hackers' field of study is considered sacred, yet when usability people of equal expertise in their field try to explain how to correct some very bad usability problems with free software, they are told by technically-inclined linux zealots that their field of study, put between a sarcastic pair of quotes, is BS. A prominant kernel hacker once told me that he couldn't believe that "[usability] people get paid to criticize the work of others". I think of this quote everytime someone poses the quote "why linux has had such extraordinary success on the server yet such a hard time on the desktop?".

Technical expertise is lauded and user interface expertise is devalued and mocked. There's a reason why there is such a dearth of usability people in the free software community. It's attitudes like these, people.

I often say that Bill Gates doesn't have to lift a finger to crush desktop linux because so many people in the linux community are doing his job *for* him.

But I am a victim

[Inoshiro]

When I try to buy a laptop, and find out there is no "unbundled" option for that laptop.

Imagine if you tried to buy a portable CD player. Rather than buying just the CD player for 100$ or so, you have to pay 115$ for it and 2 Backstreet boys CDs (a savings of 15$!). You try and tell them that you don't want the Backstreet boys CDs, because you have a collection of your own music to listen.

"We can't, sir. It's bundled. It represents a savings to you anyways, so you are getting a good value. Since every player is sold with CDs, only people who are commiting music piracy would have music separate from the players anyways."

But the thing is, I'm paying for something I don't want and won't use. If I disagree with the licence and try to return Windows for the money I paid for it as a bundle price, I end up having to deal with the retailer, OEM, and Microsoft all pointing fingers at each other. "Talk to them, they're the ones who should give you your money."

Microsoft gets my money without my consent. This is robery -- they are stealing from me.

Re:It is /.ed but it's real

[WWWWolf]

I was looking for the Cool Desktop for Linux, and halfway there, I realized I don't need it.

It was sort of a moment of deep realization. What am I looking for? Something that looks good, or something that does the job?

WindowMaker does the job.

WindowMaker works. I don't care what it looks like. It can be made look nice, too, but I don't need good looks, just something that doesn't make my eyes bleed. It works. It looks decent enough. It works.

"I have this cool new dock", said the MacOS X user. "Oh, that, I had a NEXTSTEP dock years ago, because the Window Maker folks made a desktop that works", I replied.

"Oh goody! The application finally drew its window on screen!" quoth the WinXP user. "But I already finished my work by this time, because this thing works", I replied.

Window Maker works. It may look cool, but it actually works.

What if you need a laptop?

[Inoshiro]

You can't get a laptop unbundled from Windows (or at least, you couldn't for many years). What are your choices? Well, you can use a Macintosh laptop (great if your task works there), but the fact is that Microsoft is a monopoly. They shouldn't legally be able to remove choice to the point where I can't not get Windows on an x86-based laptop.