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

Mirror

[AmigaAvenger]

Here's a mirror, the other one already had the screen shots yanked, by microsoft.

TechCritic

Re:Mirror

[AmigaAvenger]

Oops, almost forgot my own mirror!

Longhorn PDF dump of original

Re:Mirror

[nettdata]

the other one already had the screen shots yanked

And here I thought that they's changed the BSOD to the WSOD (White Screen of Death)

Re:Mirror

[cscx]

Yeah, too bad when I submitted this TWO WHOLE WEEKS AGO (see below) the screenshots were still up, yet the slashdot editors rejected it instantly... i.e. within a minute.

2002-10-21 03:04:41 Windows NT 6 (Longhorn) Screenshots Revealed (articles,microsoft) (rejected)

Re:Mirror

[AmigaAvenger]

nope, take a look at the other mirror... http://www.icrontic.com/modules.php?op=modload&nam e=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=112&pa ge=1

Mirrors

[Anonymous Coward]

Since its as slow as windows is heres the mirrors they list on the page with all the graphics (huh?) http://www.icrontic.com/modules.php?op=modload&nam e=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=112&pa ge=1

http://www.tech-critic.com/modules.php?name=News&f ile=article&sid=358&mode=&order=0&thol d=0

but they slow as well...

Re:Mirrors

[frank249]

When you go to the Icrontic link you see:

With the help of the folks at WiNBETA we were able to get our dirty little hands on some Windows Longhorn screenies.

These are *legit* and actual screenshots -- no photoshop action here folks.

This article is quoted from WiNBETA here.

SCREENSHOTS REMOVED DUE TO MICROSOFT REQUEST

That was fast work by Microsoft

Re:Mirrors

[Blkdeath]

The first one says the screenshots have been removed due to microsoft request!?

Not to be black-helicopterish or anything (as if that's ever stopped me. ;) ) but wouldn't adding a line like "REMOVED DUE TO MICROSOFT REQUEST" give the shots an ounce of legitimacy? I mean, they already had to make a claim that they are, in fact, real, and went so far as to suggest a possible method by which they could be faked ...

How would a person go about confirming whether or not Microsoft took action? Phone them and ask? Which office? Which department? Would they even answer questions to the public about it?

Everything just wraps into a nice little package, doesn't it?

Re:Mirrors

[loply]

I hardly think theyre keeping an eye on slashdot.

http://images.google.com/images?q=windows+longhorn &ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en

Pictures of Longhorn have been on google for WEEKS now. So somebody puts them on a website. Big deal.

The bigger clock...

[kitzilla]

...will be useful to those trying to keep track of their .NET fees and licensing renewals.

Re:The bigger clock...

[Reziac]

It had to be bigger, to display all those dollar signs correctly!

pre-emptive /.ing?

[Lxy]

"In other news today, the launch of Microsoft's new conceptual OS, 'Longhorn', was brought to a screetching halt. A band of rebel hackers known only as 'slashdot' has taken measures to stop this OS from ever seeing the light of day. By using advanced DDoS techniques, the rebels have brought the server to its knees, preventing further interest from the public."

Re:pre-emptive /.ing?

[Faust7]

"By using advanced DDoS techniques, the rebels have brought the server to its knees, preventing further interest from the public."

Cute, but methinks the public would be even more interested in what they weren't allowed to see.

Re:pre-emptive /.ing?

[Uruk]

Its just a preview of a future far off OS that you dont even have to use in the frist place.

Are you sure about that? I'm not trying to tell you that the sky is falling, but it might make sense that Palladium would be shipped with Longhorn for the first time. If the palladium architecture actually gets put in place, it might rapidly become very difficult to use free operating systems. Oh sure, they'd work just fine - as long as you're not concerned with interoperating with those who do choose to use proprietary software.

Re:pre-emptive /.ing?

[whereiswaldo]

Speaking of images, check this priceless item out:

http://www.glowbowl.com/media/horn_boppers.gif

Don't forget your Horn Boppers while surfing with Longhorn!

Seriously, I can't forget the mental image of Gates growing a horn through his forehead every time I hear of this OS. <Mr.Burns_accent>Excellent. The transformation is almost complete...</>

Mirrors.

[The Cydonian]

I seem to be getting the remnants of the website and it's pointing to two mirrors. Obviously, the original website is having problems catering to slash-traffic, so it's best if you go to the other two sites instead.

As for additions, there seem to be a funky looking clock and a program list on the side. Nice addition, if you ask me, getting sick of the Start button myself...

Pics this early are almost pointless.

[TellarHK]

Microsoft probably won't put in any significant look and feel changes until much later in the testing program, probably someplace around beta 3. I'd say it's very likely they'll try and hold something impressive back until then, to help keep the hype machine cranking away.

But screw it, maybe by the time Longhorn comes out, I'll be able to have gotten myself a Mac desktop and won't care about Windows. The only thing making me hope for a death of PC gaming is the fact it's the last thing really keeping the machine on my desk a Windows one.

Re:Pics this early are almost pointless.

[Scooby Snacks]

Microsoft probably won't put in any significant look and feel changes until much later in the testing program, probably someplace around beta 3. I'd say it's very likely they'll try and hold something impressive back until then, to help keep the hype machine cranking away.

Well, one thing to notice in the screenshots is in the Sidebar thingy on the right -- it looks like they have virtual desktops! That alone, IMO, is fairly big news.

Re:Pics this early are almost pointless.

[gl4ss]

not to mention that UI changes are pointless anyways with modern day's customizability, who cares if the mouse cursor is big honkin billy face or the clock is bigger if they can be very simply added to older systems as well? nobody except people who think that makes their system honkin faster and preorder it because it's so cooooool. it has been pointed out earlier that these screenshots running around the net could have been pretty easily generated with windows xp, or 2k, or christs sake even with win98.


http://jussila.adsl.netsonic.fi/~glass/desktop.j pg
an just as real prediction of mine what longhorn will look.

Re:Pics this early are almost pointless.

[zerocool^]

Microsoft probably won't put in any significant look and feel changes until much later in the testing program, probably someplace around beta 3.

Not true. I had a time release copy of codename whistler early in 2000, and it later became XP. The interface was virtually identical to the final XP release, well over a year before it came out.

Re:Pics this early are almost pointless.

[cscx]

XP has virtual desktops... you just need to download the "Virtual Desktop Manager" applet... here.

Sorry, I'm really, really sorry

[Zeebs]

I'll just try and save a little time for the trolls.
1) Imagine a beowulf cluster of these.
2) ...
3) PROFIT!!!!!!

w1nd0wz sUx0Rz!!!

umm did I miss anything?

Re:Newsflash - NO screenshots at Icrontic.

[The Cydonian]

Addition: Icrontic has yanked the screenshots off on Microsoft's request. My wishes to the good folks at tech-critic, let's see how long you last.

CNN

[mr. phantastik]

Is it just me, or is the screen just as cluttered as CNN at any given moment? I keep expecting the MS stock quote to slide accross the screen...

Re:CNN

[Ponty]

You're right as rain. All of the colors are mighty distracting (this is coming from a Mac OS X user, too.) It's like a big cartoon operating system with oversized buttons and title bars. It's like everything's been inflated, and I think it looks goofy.

Btw, kick-ass website. Seriously.

bluejeans.jpg

[BaconLT]

Does anybody have the mirror of a site containing bluejeans.jpg?

As a computer scientist, that is an interesting aspect of longhorn I'd like to investigate for it's technically stimulating intrinsic value.

Re:bluejeans.jpg

[Anonymous Coward]

well, someone told me you can find it at http://dreamsource.de/pics/chickpics/pages/417.htm

Re:bluejeans.jpg

[Nintendork]

Click on the up arrow to see some of my other girlfriends. Pages 2 and 3 will be up soon.

-Lucas (a.k.a. The Pimp)

Re:bluejeans.jpg

[Nintendork]

Oh, I almost forgot to post the list of girls from my wild threesomes. Here you are.

http://dreamsource.de/pics/kisspics/

-Lucas (a.k.a. The Pimp)

My god...

[Komrade S.]

Could you guys link to the URL with the ADVERTS, rather than the frame. The poor guys have to pay for their bandwidth somehow. It even asks you to expressly do that at the bottom of the page. Cruel cruel people...

Re:My god...

[ceejayoz]

30 seconds of Javascript coding would have solved their problem for them...

What's fastest

[Zakabog]

I wonder what's fastest in removing content from the internet, the Slashdot effect or Microsoft.

Virtual desktops?

[cstrommen]

It appears that Microsoft finally has seen the light, as these screenshots clearly show virtual desktops being supported (and used) directly from the the os..

Re:Virtual desktops?

[Alex_Ionescu]

You can get the Microsoft Virtual Desktops for Windows XP right here: http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/In stall/2/WXP/EN-US/DeskmanPowertoySetup.exe

Re:Virtual desktops?

[0xdeadbeef]

Of course they have virtual desktops. How else would it be usable, what with all the wasted real-estate from those gargantuan dialog windows, fat vertical dock, and that ugly-ass Aqua-wannabe theme?

Microsoft is imitating the Linux desktop, circa 1998.

Re:Virtual desktops?

[Phosphor3k]

You can also get virtual desktops using NVIDIA's latest DET drivers( 40.42, methinks). I've tested it, and it works great under Win2k and WinXP. Nice little bonus.

Famous Celebrity

[Buckbeak]

Did anyone notice that in one of the screenshots Bjork is holding a camera. If she's in it, it must be a stable and secure operating system.

Re:Famous Celebrity

[fatius]

She freaked out because the photographer wouldn't stop taking pictures of her kid.

Most the time photographers do that to get a rise out of a star to get the pictures of them freaking out.

Average comments so far

[NorthDude]

Since its as slow as windows...
Who cares about the UI ... someone needs to do something about theses servers
The interface looks nice, but it may be somewhat inefficent. This news isn't very important.


Somehow, it is Slashdotted... Go figure!!!

clock?

[Spirilis]

"... .NET capability, and a bigger cock"
Err, I read that WAY wrong. "Yeah, Windows Longhorn sports a bigger cock, to fuck its users harder..."

Re:clock?

[spinlocked]

Strikes me as being a good porn star name surname.

Woody Longhorn perhaps...

Re:clock?

[Billly Gates]

Sounds like someone is reading this with some naughty sub-conscious thoughts.

corollary to the law of software envelopment

[banky]

JWZ's Law Of Software Envelopment states that all programs expand until they can read mail.

I posit a corollary, the Law Of GUI Envelopment: all windows will eventually be round.

Aqua has rounded corners. Now XP does. What, do they think they sharp edges might hurt someone?

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[rnd()]

haha... one might also hypothesize that all windows will at some point blend transparently into one another.

If they were round, that image looks a lot like those described by people who have had near-death experiences. All that's missing are the voices of loved ones calling the user's name.

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[gl4ss]

they think there fits more windows to screen if they're round, since they take (possibly)less area.

(ok you might not be able to use the desk space salvaged that way but who cares, besides than that it looks sci-fi).

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[jonathan_atkinson]

You mean like the GNU Hello, World! software?

--Jon

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[Locutus]

Don't know if you ever saw OpenDoc but that allowed windows of any shape. Not just rounded corners of rectangles. It was really cool. IMHO.

The general computing platform will eventually gat that in about 10 years.

LoB

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[Huge Pi Removal]

OpenDoc? Wasn't that some completely random bit of Apple internetty type technology that flew about as well as a lead penguin?

Surely Kaleidoscope (www.kaleidoscope.net) is what you mean :) Or did I get confused about OpenDoc?

Hmmm, I seem to remember posting something like this a few days back: it *still* looks as chunky and uninspiring as Windows always has done. I mean, come *on*! It's just so ugly. And what's with all those damn colours everywhere? Even Apple keeps window title bars neutral. Eugh.

People who are used to Windows who design things almost invariably come up with Windows-looking things. I have yet to see a skin for Windows (or Gnome, etc, etc) that actually looks like not-windows.

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[ConceptJunkie]

I recently coined my own Microsoft-specific version of that law after reading some info about Office 11 being able to create documents that automatically download files off of the Internet when you open them.

It's been my sig for a couple weeks now.

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[kalidasa]

I was under the impression that Enlightenment allows non-rectangular windows.

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[zapfie]

What, do they think they sharp edges might hurt someone?

No, but I think you are closer than you think. Rounded edges are more visually comforting than sharp ones. I think computers just tend to use rectangles because they are a very easy shape for a computer to logically deal with. Next time you are driving down street or the highway, check out all the rounded edges on the street signs. Only sign I can think of that doesn't use rounded edges is the stop sign, for obvious reasons. Check most objects on your desk right now. They pretty much all sport rounded edges. Even rectangular objects such as standard computer boxes and monitors use rounded edges.. some of that might be safety, but there is definately an attempt to make these objects more visually appealing using rounder edges.

Re:corollary to the law of software envelopment

[pz]

JWZ's Law Of Software Envelopment states that all programs expand until they can read mail.

That would have been originally formulated as, "all programs expand until they become Emacs," observed by many people over the years at MIT's LCS/AI labs.

MS is faster than slashdot

[eagl]

All three of the officially listed mirrors linked from the story are either down or carrying a line "screenshots removed at microsoft's request."

Bummer

Fake

[FooBarWidget]

Those screenshots are fake! Look at the name in the background.
- "Windows Longhorn XP"? Microsoft always use names like "Windows Longhorn ".
- Look at the expiration date. A beta that lasts for a year? Impossible.
- "MSN Messenger 5.0" in the start menu. MSN Messenger has been renamed to Windows Messenger since WinXP!

Re:Fake

[m_chan]

Most obvious damning evidence to support your case that these shots are faked:

From System Properties Screenshot:

AMD Athlon(tm) Processor
998 MHz
512 MB of RAM

Har.

But seriously, though I have not spent much time in WindowsXP personally, one thing that I noticed immediately upon setting it up for clients is that more and more window space is given over to branding (mucho!) and white space, with less "real" information available.

This trend appears to be continuing with the next Windows release, should these screenshots be legitimate. I realize that there are plenty of ways to increase the density of information displayed through window customization, but the default settings are moving more and more to the point of being devoid of actual control and content. "Hey, Joe, you're using Windows! (press okay to return to your desktop, or cancel to return to your desktop)"

For some, I would imagine that when looking at the high-density desktop UI I enjoy, they would see it as all wrong and just a bunch of chart clutter. To each, I suppose. Mmmm, gummy. Anyway, running the interface shown in those screenshots would be close to pure hell on low-resolution displays with the scrolling and the carpal and the scrolling.

Re:Fake

[Professor_Oak]

Actually Win Xp is 5.1 since it uses the Windows 2000 core.

Re:Fake

[Merconium]

Actually, Win2k is 5, and XP is 5.1 (run cmd and see the version number.) There was an avi titled "LH3683PreviewLong-WinBeta" that showed him moving around on the desktop. I suppose you might be able to doctor that, but it seems really unlikely.

Re:Fake

[Reziac]

You say "one thing that I noticed immediately upon setting it up for clients is that more and more window space is given over to branding (mucho!) and white space, with less "real" information available" plus a few more quite valid observations along that line.

Actually, this trend has been in place since IE4's Active Desktop's "web content in every window" thing. It first became the default in Win98, grew another step in Win2K, and contaged directly to WinME and XP -- but in XP it grew by an order of magnitude, to where a default display is more "Hello stupid user, you're so incompetent we'll just TELL you what you're doing and what your files are" than it is useful information. On a low-res screen, even its initial limited incarnation can waste over 75% of the screen. And in my observation, it's even MORE intimidating to newbies, because it's so visually distracting.

The wasted screen estate, not to mention the useless clutter, makes me insane and consequently is the first thing I do away with. Funny thing: if you delve deep enough into XP's admin tools, all this clutter goes away without being told to! Gee, could it be that admin types don't have time to scroll around trying to see the rest of the screen??

And another menu sidebar??! It reminds me of Active Desktop's "Channels" (partner advertising), and I wouldn't be surprised if this new menu sidebar eventually becomes a streaming ad host.

M$ has said that they want to blur the distinction between Web and Desktop, and for a certainty, Active Desktop and its horrible brood do tend to look more like misplaced web pages than like useful desktop elements.

M$'s own research indicates that most users treat Windows like a big menuing system, not as a multitasking workspace (and this unfortunately agrees with my own observation of average users), but how this justifies turning the desktop into nothing BUT a menuing system escapes me.

Not sure what you consider "high density desktop" but mine tend to collect 30-40 icons (mostly useful, tho some are solely for decorative effect) and I think having a score of windows open at once is "normal". :)

Oh, as to the futzy CPU speed, yesterday I was fiddling with a new linux install on a venerable K6-200, and something or other informed me that it was a "199MHz CPU". Er, well, if you say so!!

Re:Fake

[Zeinfeld]

There was an avi titled "LH3683PreviewLong-WinBeta" that showed him moving around on the desktop. I suppose you might be able to doctor that, but it seems really unlikely.

Seems very easy to me, the UI design is pure XP with a smal number of tweaks that can probably be kludged up from existing applets by changing the background gif.

The launch bar looks like a hack someone wrote in VB.

Re:Fake

[jeffy210]

"- Look at the expiration date. A beta that lasts for a year? Impossible."

I can't refute your other two points as i don't know enough about them, but as for the Beta, the Windows 2000 betas (RC2 and RC3), had a 444 day trial time, which is well over a year.

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.

Re:Fake

[duplicate-nickname]

Microsoft considers their NT version numbers to be the following:
Windows 2000 = NT 5.0
Windows XP = NT 5.1
Windows.NET = NT 5.5
Longhorn = NT 6.0

Yes, XP and .NET are not considered major version upgrades. Longhorn will be huge upgrade to the Windows platform.

Re:Fake

[m_chan]

The comment regarding the CPU speed illustrating "the fakeness" was clearly a bad attempt on my part to make fun of what the minimum system requirements for the next iteration of Windows must be, and that this rig clearly would not be up to the task. Trite, cliched, and I apologize.

I think you hit the nail on the head when describing the blurring of distinction between web and desktop. It is this unification of IE and the rest of the interface that I find to be most disenchanting as I don't agree with the design paradigm.

By density, I was describing that I don't allow much wasted space within a window and typically find that I work more efficiently being able to see more content of the document at once, as opposed to bordering/white space. I also typically toggle between various applications and find not as easy to quickly identify what window I'm looking at if the interface is too "same-ish". But as I said before, to each.

Re:Fake

[Reziac]

CPU-speed doinking: Oh! Now this is suddenly hilarious!

I have no idea whether the screenshots are real or fake and only did the most cursory examination (I did read someone's dissertation on why they appear edited, tho). Decided to treat 'em as real for discussion purposes, because they illustrate everything that's wrong with the direction the Windows UI is headed.

As to "blurring the distinction between web and desktop" -- I'm quoting M$ -- at one of their local seminars, they *stated* that was their intent. I thought the idea sounded a lot more plausible before I actually experienced it, but in realworld use it's at best annoying. XP beta testers have told me there was much howling about the increased webbiness of the interface, to no avail. Personally I think M$ is currently using it as part of their push (which they've also described at seminars) to have both your apps and your docs on their servers, accessable via a subscription fee. If everyone gets used to the idea that the web IS the desktop, this dumb-terminal/subscription concept becomes a lot easier to market.

Ah, density, yes. You'd probably find my workspace comfortable enough, then -- I also prefer seeing more of the document, with only enough whitespace for perspective. I organise stuff to maximize workspace as far as I can without losing stuff I use, like toolbars (this is one reason I so vastly prefer Corel PhotoPaint to Adobe Photoshop -- Photopaint does intelligent toolbar management and leaves far more of the screen to MY uses).

The only exception are windows where my primary task is reading, frex web pages. On a 19" monitor at 1024x768, fullscreen web pages are awkward reading (much as a newspaper with no columns would be!) so my standard browser window is set to 800x600. Of course, I often have a dozen browser windows up at once, plus whatever else. I've worn the corner off my TAB key. :)

OTOH, I know people who get completely discombobilated if they can so much as see a second window onscreen, but some folk multitask well, and some don't. But here's something odd I've noticed: In general, folk who think Windows is for multitasking (and abuse it like we do :) have very tidy, organized desktops, with icons neatly grouped by program type or function. Conversely people who only cope well with one window at a time tend to have shortcut icons randomly scattered all over their desktop, and seem to LIKE it that way (*everyone* I know who is dyslexic does that!)

Seems related to how different folks' visual recognition brain-engines work. The more text-oriented types tend to prefer grouped icons and actually read the labels; graphic-oriented types use pattern recognition to locate their icons. (As a side note, I've also noticed that text-oriented folk tend to prefer WordPerfect, while graphic-oriented folk uniformly prefer Word, and often prefer Macs as well.)

Anyway, back to our topic -- Windows is becoming less and less configurable for text-oriented people, and judging by the trends in XP and Longhorn, is headed toward being a pattern-recognition-ONLY interface, thus increasingly awkward for a good chunk of users. :(

Re:Fake

[Reziac]

Win2K RC1 also had a 444 day trial time. I always wondered how they came up with such an arbitrary number!!

Re:Fake

[Dirtside]

They take a stable version of their product and work from there.

ObKarmaBurnJoke: Where is Microsoft going to get a stable version of any product of theirs? :)

Re:Fake

[alexburke]

Longhorn would be NT7 (2000 is NT5, XP is NT6). The most likely name for Longhorn would be Windows.NET

Oh boy, where do I start?

Windows 2000 is Windows NT 5.0.
Windows XP is Windows NT 5.1. (Look at the System Control Panel of an XP box sometime.)
Windows .NET Server RC1 is Windows NT 5.2, build 3663. I know this because I run it on one of my boxes (I have an MSDN subscription).

It makes sense, then, that Longhorn will be Windows NT 5.3 or more likely 6.0.

Re:Fake

[DennyK]

But here's something odd I've noticed: In general, folk who think Windows is for multitasking (and abuse it like we do :) have very tidy, organized desktops, with icons neatly grouped by program type or function. Conversely people who only cope well with one window at a time tend to have shortcut icons randomly scattered all over their desktop, and seem to LIKE it that way

Interesting...I usually work with 12+ windows open almost all of the time, but my desktop is entirely covered with random icons in some random order. I guess I'm more of a "visual" person, since I usually memorize the location of the icons (and every time Windows hiccups and resets the order to some other random pattern, I spend the next week opening Quake when I want to check my email... ;) ). At work, I always open my programs and windows in a specific order, and if they get out of order somehow, I usually close everything down and start all over...otherwise I get all twitchy... ;-D

That said...I HATE wasted space in windows. Especially since I have to use 800x600 on a 17" screen or I can't see anything. Looking at those screenshots with those huge icons, and sidebars, and web panes or whatever the hell they're called, and window "titles" that take up 1/4 of the screen...*shudder* Not for me, thanks. I turned all that crap off in Windows 98 first chance I got. I've never understood who actually likes that stuff. Most newbies I've worked with just find it confusing as heck, and most experiened users find it useless. As for the colors and shapes, give me sharp corners and battleship grey dialog boxes any day. I also hate antialiased fonts myself...they look very blurry to me, and give me a headache when I try to read something like a PDF file or whatnot that "smooths" the fonts. I'd rather have pixelated fonts that are sharp and clear than smooth fonts that make me think my glasses are smudged when I stare at 'em too long... ;)

DennyK

Re:Fake

[Reziac]

800x600 on a 17" screen is kinda unusual. Some quirk of your vision may be why you memorize icon locations that way. Me, I have to read the label to see what each one is anyway, but I do like 'em grouped so I know where to look.

My desktops can be seen linked from http://home.earthlink.net/~rividh/pc/index.htm .. the XP setup is still new and has hardly anything installed, but isn't that background graphic perfect? Note the positioning of the DOS app icons. :)

I tend to want my everyday programs opening in the same places all the time mainly because of handiness for drag, click, or whatever between their windows, but some are set fullscreen and some aren't. My eyes have their notions about what is a "normal" font size, plus I hate having to sidescroll to see everything.

I agree completely about plain functional grey dialogs (my workspace is also set grey as it's easier on the eyes -- mine are glare-sensitive), sharp corners, and anti-aliased fonts!! AA'ing has its uses, but in some programs the result is just blurry. A computer is a tool first, a toy second. I swear whoever designed XP's default look spent too much time with Playskool toys!! Etch-a-sketch, anyone?

Re:Fake

[m_chan]

You mentioned one out of three applications that keeps me working within Windows part of the time. Corel PhotoPaint has been my image editor of choice for a long time. I attempted to use the linux version but it just didn't cut it in the first iteration, and now that project seems to have been abandoned. Too bad.

HomeSite has been my favorite PHP/HTML editor for a few years. I am trying to move to Quanta, whose team has done a really good job. VegasVideo is hands-down my favorite piece of software I get to use.

Each of these applications provide an easy path to tailoring the workspace to one's particular preference. However, now I am pretty sure that I just spoke from the point of being overly familiar with my choice applications and getting all codgy about the glowy-shiny horning in on me rather than making a case for UI differentiation between applications and OS. (Huh? where am I.)

Anyway, my eyes also agree with the choice of plain-Jane window frames with the majority of it given over to content, with only the widgets I choose available. The windowing interface of current and forthcoming MS-OSessess (and others) hijack the display, and the first thing I do when turning on a new install of whatever OS is to try and take it back. I imagine that the average user will have little motivation to (or are discouraged from.. cogent point, yours about the sidebar.. this glimpse of your directory structure brought to you by Jack-In-The-Box) finding something different than out-of-box settings, even though there may be a _better_ way.

Re:Fake

[Reziac]

Oh yes, Photopaint.. one of my everyday apps, I can't live without it. I have Photoshop and PaintShopPro, but Photopaint runs rings around 'em performance-wise and is vastly more user-friendly (even if its screenspace management wasn't so much better!) CorelDraw v9 for linux exists (I've seen the retail box) but no idea how good it is. I did try WordPerfect8 (another must-have, along with old WP5.1 which I still use every day) as installed by Caldera's linux incarnation, and it worked fine as far as I went, other than the buttons being greeked (maybe because Caldera had problems with that monitor and resolution).

I've got the downloadable PhotoPaint 8 ... spent the past couple days trying out a pile of middle-aged linux disties, but will have to reinstall Mandrake before I can check it out, that being the only disty in my CD pile remotely as well-behaved as Win9* (also the only one that found the PnP modem). Gods, I've never seen so much disk-thrashing, even with plenty of RAM.

I've not got into PHP yet, but my fave HTML editor is old AOLpress v2.0 -- to where I'd say it's a "must have" app as well. I've mucked about with various others (incl. FP, DW, Amaya, Trellix, ColdFusion), but all still lack some of AOLpress' quick usability: WYSIWYG *and* raw HTML modes with the ability to simultaneously function as a pure browser, gets paths right without any thumping around first, anally-correct 100% legible HTML, and no clutter required to access all the functions. I dearly wish AOL would release the source, so someone could update it (and fix a couple bugs :)

And then there's Netscape 3.04, *still* my browser of choice, mainly for efficiency and maximal screen estate. I have about 15 different browsers installed among my machines, from ancient up thru newish IE/NS/Moz; NS3.04 is the one I can't live without. I did download its *NIX versions for safekeeping :)

These apps behave how *I* want them to, function with a minimum of fuss and bother, are all generally quite stable (or at least when they fall over, don't take the system with them), and DON'T clutter my screen with useless or ill-conceived subwindows that don't automagically get out of my way when they're not in use.

Familiarity doesn't have much to do with it; if it did, I'd still be using my Win3.1 setup or my old DOS box, with over 10 years service between 'em!! But fact is, if a new app comes along that answers a need and doesn't annoy me more than it's worth, I'll jump ship in no time flat. I knew my Win3.1 setup well enough to navigate without a working monitor (and it was so complex, Win3.1 was maxed out), but Win95 sucked me away because of -- would you believe right-click?!!

Most users do indeed just accept whatever interface is put before them, and become resigned to it no matter how much they hate it. They're utterly astonished when someone shows them how to change the UI more to their liking.

As to discouraging users from trying -- there's a bug in XP's UI config that can cause it to irrevocably revert from classic to XP default (after that it can only be changed back via a prior Restore point) and considering how the options are labeled, I'm not so sure that's not by design, especially since XP does not reinstall gracefully (nothing is preserved except the documents directory, and not quite right at that).

"This glimpse of your directory structure brought to you by Jack-In-The-Box" ... you are a sick man [g] and perhaps more prescient than you realise.. Don't know if it survived into the retail version and haven't gone looking for it, but I've been told that XP's basic photo editor DID have a "wouldn't you rather send your pictures to Kodak for editing?" popup that assaulted the user before they could edit their own files. (DIE, CLIPPY's KIN, DIE!!!)

more

[__aajelt3877]

XBetas has some.

KDE Goldmine

[szcx]

I imagine the creativity-challenged folks at KDE are rubbing their hands with glee right about now. Microsoft spends millions on UI R&D so that OSS projects can appropriate their discoveries ;-)

Microsoft(TM) - We do the hard work so you don't have to

Re:KDE Goldmine

[szcx]

you would think, say, Visual Studio would be a whole lot better than it is

Seems good enough for KDevelop :-P

Re:KDE Goldmine

[Gordonjcp]

Wise words indeed from the elderly ALU...

Correction/addition to my above post

[FooBarWidget]

"- "Windows Longhorn XP"? Microsoft always use names like "Windows Longhorn "."

(forgot Slashdot strip HTML tags)
What I mean is, names like "Windows [Codename] [Build ID]", such as "Windows Longhorn Build 1678578236785"

Those screenshots just can't be real. They're true usability nightmares. An extra panel that duplicates the Start Menu's function? Totally unintuitive and confusing! Look at Windows Explorer, it's cluttered as hell. Not even Microsoft UIs can be that bad.

Re:Correction/addition to my above post

[Alex_Ionescu]

Actually, the screenshots are 100% real.
There was even a 6-minute long movie made of the OS with HyperCapture. Don't tell me someone spent time faking that.
And yes, betas can expire after a year, but this is an alpha, and since the whole program will last till 2004/2005, it's very normal for such a high expiration date. Alphas sometimes don't even have one.
As for MSN 5.0, that's simply the person who had the leaked version that decided to install it, it's not part of the OS.
Trust me, these are real.

Re:Correction/addition to my above post

[Anonymous Coward]

They are fake.

Shamelessly stolen from a post at the bottom of the tech-critic.com site:

The screenshots are fake for the following reasons (this is XP with a custom theme and then some hacking around in an image editor)...

For the Setup screen...

a) In the window, horizontal bar at the top doesn't meet the right hand side.
b) Alpha plane gone on setup icon (definitely would NOT happen to one icon and not others).
c) This is a BIG giveaway all over the place... The current user settings have font smoothing set to anti-alias, not cleartype or none. Anti-alias text does not come into play for small fonts including 8pt (as can be seen on dektop icons, start bar, etc). However, the new bar on the right IS anti-aliasing these fonts and not only that, but it's not using font hinting (aligning the text to the nearest pixel) which is standard for cleartype or anti-aliasing... it's fake text drawn in a graphics package.

The sidebar as startmenu screen...
d) Looks nice, but examine the desktop images... no windows in the first one... later on they have images of the windows!

Sidebar on the right...
e) Where did the windows in the desktop image come from in this one ?
f) Aren't those icons on the bar a bit big compared with the later bars?

Display Properties screen (oh my god)...
g) Nice text antialiasing again (hmm)
h) 'You can change the image that appears on your windo...' ooops. Clipped that text a bit. Note this can't happen with the windows API when you have a multi-line text field (using TextOut, etc). Hmm... minor cockup
i) Ah my windows are back in the desktop images (on the sidebar), but now the current window is bigger with a black splodge at the bottom.

My Computer screen...
j) Love the antialiasing on the left, but not in the middle... nice.
k) How fake are the section buttons on the left hand side? Come on guys... you can't flip images horizontally... MS insist on a top left light source. Oh, and your button with the shadow should either have an alpha plane or not... don't do half a job... it really doens't look real.

My Documents...
l) Oooh, Oooh, an anti-aliased dropdown. Fake Fake Fake.

My Pictures..
m) Nice... what happened to Burn CD though? Have MS dropped it now they support DVD burning?
n) Oops, you should have removed the LH.bmp from your My Pictures. Remember you only used it to create the backgroud.

DOS Setup
o) Love it... now your just taking the piss. How did you get the screenshot??? and the 'install Windows Longhorn 2004 using DOS 1985' is excelent. Very funny :-D
p) The URL is superb. ROTFLMAO.

So...

Nice theming... love the sidebar, good use of blending in your graphics package, but FAKE FAKE FAKE.

Great for a laugh though. :-D

Si.

Re:Correction/addition to my above post

[zardie]

They could still be real. I don't believe it, but it's possible.

1. It's a technology preview. It's not a widespread beta release - it's all internal at this stage. that means things might be uneven or rough. Don't believe me - read some old magazine reviews of the pre-beta IE4 releases with shell integration. Flip back to an old 1993 magazine (December issue of Windows Sources I think it was) and you'll find screenshots of a Windows UI that looks a little different to Windows 95 - but it was the Chicago Beta (around buld 200 or thereabouts - release/RTM of Win95 was around build 600 but they bumped it to 950 to sound cooler).

2. They could have changed the anti aliasing capabilities of Longhorn. Oh no! My OS X 10.2 screenshots are fake, they use better antialiasing than OS 10.1 ... see my point?

3. Yes, the sidebar doubles up on a lot of functions. How many ways can you run a program or copy a file in Windows XP? Microsoft love making it as easy (and confusing) as possible to do stuff, even if it means making it possible to do it in slightly less than a million ways.

4. The screenshots still say Windows XP. My Windows 98 betas still said 95. My Windows Me builds said 98 in their early phase. Microsoft don't care too much about polishing things in the pre-beta/development release stage.

5. No mention of object oriented FS. it's coming - I've had two Microsoft developers personally assure me that it's coming RSN - in the next release of Windows. So yes, fake, but I call upon different evidence for that decision.

Re:Correction/addition to my above post

[cscx]

No mention of object oriented FS. it's coming - I've had two Microsoft developers personally assure me that it's coming RSN - in the next release of Windows. So yes, fake, but I call upon different evidence for that decision.


Did you notice that little progress bar in My computer under the drives? That's supposed to be working through an emulation layer for the new FS, to make it talk to NTFS.

Re:Correction/addition to my above post

[Craig Davison]

It all looks "real" to me except for that sidebar thing. It doesn't look like the rest of the UI at all. It doesn't even seem like something Microsoft would put in their UI. Look at the bizarre fonts that don't appear anywhere else on the screen. Note how the text doesn't line up in the 5th screenshot (caption: "Avalon is the codename for the Longhorn API...")

Also, the version of Longhorn may well be 6.0, but why? I would expect 5.2 (win2k was 5.0, winxp was 5.1), unless they've made some huge changes.

Meanwhile, in Redmond, WA

[mdb31]

Microsoft Lawyer #1 So, what should we do about those sites displaying unauthorized screen shots from our Intellectual Property(tm)? Some of them are not responding too well to our usual cease & desist letters...

Microsoft Lawyer #2 Just post their URLs to Slashdot, that will take care of 'em!

Microsoft Lawyer #1 Sweeeeet!

Icons on the screenshots

[torqer]

Anyone else take note of the 7th icon on the screeners? "Fix-It" heh :) Gotta love it.

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.

Heh

[Otis_INF]

Slashdot posts some screenshots taken from an early beta of a 'who knows when it's released, if ever'-Microsoft Operating System, and what do you think will happen?

a) The server with the images won't receive a lot of hits through Slashdot, since no Linux user is interested in screenshots of a future Microsoft OS ("It's probably V4p0r anyway")
b) The server gets slashdotted 3 minutes after the posting went up, because almost every user visiting the homepage of slashdot is interested in screenshots of a future Microsoft OS.

I guessed a), but... gosh... b) is the right answer. I wonder why though.. :)

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?"

Re:Hook, line and sinker

[ceejayoz]

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

Because badly faked screenshots are bad publicity.

Re:Hook, line and sinker

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

The funny thing is, if people see faults in the screenshots, the automaticly assume that it must be a fake, and can't be due to the fact that it's in alpha (an alpha MS product aswell).

If you where to make that many near-perfect screenshots, don't you think you would see all those details because you were wanting to make sure that they didn't look like fakes?

I saw the same thing when the Palm 505 or whatever was leaked....All these 'photoshop experts' agreeing that the images were clearly fake, and provided detailed proof of it.
What was released a few days after? The exact same device in the photo.

If those screenshots looked flawless, that's when I'd be conderned if they were fakes or not.

BTW. I'm not saying that these are real, rather that you can't dissmiss them as being fake by the evidence you gave.

Anyway, the biggest evidence that these are real screenshots is that the background image is of such shitty quality. What kind of person could believe that MS would still give you such a collection of crappy images after all the $ spent of marketing fluff and trying the make the GUI look good? ;)

Re:Hook, line and sinker

[horza]

Anyway, the biggest evidence that these are real screenshots is that the background image is of such shitty quality. What kind of person could believe that MS would still give you such a collection of crappy images after all the $ spent of marketing fluff and trying the make the GUI look good? ;)

The same kind of people that use clip-art personas for their testamonials instead of spending a couple of dollars on a roll of film?

Phillip.

Re:Hook, line and sinker

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I think I misslead you (me being a bit unclear). What I meant was. What kinda of person would of guessed to use shitty quality pics in order to make their fake screenshots look real? No one would expect MS to still ship such crappy pics with their OS, after all the money they have spent in other areas to (try and) make it look good.

Windows Longhorn is a true usability nightmare

[FooBarWidget]

I don't understand why people call Windows XP or Longhorn or whatever new version of Windows "userfriendly". Look at the screenshots!
There's now some kind of sidebar which duplicates the functions of the Start menu ---> confusing to new users.
If you open Windows Explorer and check My Computer, you get a complex screen with buttons, icons and progress bars.
If you go to My Documents you get overloaded with options! Any new user will get confused by that!
Not to mention all the eyecandy. Sure, it looks nice, but all those gradients and icons do is overload the user with information. New users will get confused and will have a hard time recognizing standard controls.
The entire UI is extremely cluttered.

The Longhorn GUI is good for advanced users, but will confuse new users! If GNOME or KDE do this, the Windows people will flame us down for creating a "hacker desktop" that's "not consistent" and "overloads the user with too much information". But if Windows does this, it's suddenly allright and called "huge improvements" or "innovation".
I just don't get it...

Re:Windows Longhorn is a true usability nightmare

[tshak]

Look at the screenshots!

I did, they're fake.

Links to actual images

[Xpilot]

The actual images are at

http://home.attbi.com/~mrwatchdawg_01/n.JPG ...where the n before the .JPG are integers from 1 to 10.

Multiple Desktops!

[Lord_Slepnir]

Wow! Multiple Desktops. Now Windows will have what my Linux box has had since I started using linux (about 5 years ago). Way to stay ahead of the technology curve there, Bill.

Re:Multiple Desktops!

[Lord_Slepnir]

Weird....I have RedHat 8.0, and it runs perfectly out of the box. USB et al work perfectly.

fix-it

[oliverthered]

Well if it ain't broke......

Fake

[Zeinfeld]

Before following the mirrors thread too far note that the few people to have seen the shots appear to think they are fake.

I finaly got them up, they are clearly fake and the folk saying 'it looks more like Mac' are clearly speaking through their trousers.

The screenshots look like Windows XP with a very small number of minor tweaks, a new clock and some bars showing how much of the disk is used. Both look like something you could add with photoshop. The main way they make it look different is that they put the menu bar at the side of the screen - the way most Microsofties seem to do. It actually does seem to work better on the side but I don't think the usability folk would move it. But the bar is clearly fake because it duplicates the functions already there in the start bar, you can drag and drop shortcuts to applications and use them as quicklaunch buttons already. Microsoft conceal this feature from ordinary users by describing it in the manual.

Other indications that scream fake include the fact that most of the shots come up 'XP Professional'. I have never seen a Microsoft beta that mentioned or used the codename. Longhorn would be NT7 (2000 is NT5, XP is NT6). The most likely name for Longhorn would be Windows.NET

I like

[jimlintott]

I like Blackbox with the NYZ theme so anything that doesn't present a plain black screen is just plain ugly and busy.

Re:Oh great

[PotPieMan]

This is available in Windows XP as a PowerToy.

Heh

[FrostedWheat]

Looks like Microsoft have 'switched'.

Well....

[rutledjw]

It's pretty... Looks like KDE 3 to me, and tastes like chicken.

My personal favorite is a little icon on the left-hand side with the title "Fix It". I couldn't help but thinking - "Yeah I've got a fix for you...".

That and it seems as though they've managed to elmininate more desktop space. Brilliant. I didn't want to do work there anyway. And the multiple desktops are nice. They're running neck-and-neck with CDE now! Woo-Hoo!

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

This doesn't look anything like OSX. OSX has simple and effective UI elements. This pictures show an interface that's just guady, overly distracting and inefficient.

How to Fake an OS Beta Screenshot...

[Corvaith]

Even if we presume that these images haven't been put through Photoshop--which, as others have mentioned, seems to be in evidence--then there's still no proof, without showing some actual new functionality of Windows besides how it looks, that it's not fake.

After all, there are a number of utilities out there already that change the look and feel of Windows. Between some of those and a program like Photoshop, one could very well produce 'screenshots' of anything one could conceive.

IS it FAKE? Maybe not...

[Anonymous Coward]

Several people have said that these "screen shots" are obvious Photoshop, and so "fake".

But, perhaps they are "real" UI design concepts? After all, when you design a UI like this, you let the "designers" play with pictures before rendering it all into code... Just like web design...

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

[AKnightCowboy]

Damn, Microsoft continues to prove they can make their interface look sweeter than anybody else. My X11 window manager, even when tripped out with themes doesn't look as smooth and as polished as that. Is it the anti-aliased fonts or what? It's just sweet looking. MacOS X's Aqua interface also is lacking IMHO compared to that. Maybe I will just wait for Longhorn and succumb like the other 95% of the population and just run Windows. It looks SO cool. OK, I'm done. I'll go back into Linux advocate rant mode now. Microsoft sucks. :-)

Holy shit!!

[ealar dlanvuli]

Did anyone else think WM+OSX when they saw those screen shots?

And don't they have "user interface designers" or somesuch there? Those colors are icky, not to mention all those differing window styles are confusing!

Re:Newsflash - NO screenshots at Icrontic.

[psych031337]

Fortunately, the net is global and tech-critic.com is registered to some guys in Australia. With some luck the standard US-law based cease-and-desist letter does not bear any significance down under.

I am sure MS would like to take care of that with a daisy cutter, but thankfully the US military is curently kinda preoccupied with some other guy...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

My first impression...

[mbourgon]

My, that looks a lot like Lycoris! :)

Beta? Are you mad?!

[EvilStein]

The Microsoft reference releases are unstable enough, why the hell would you want to use a BETA?
Oh, so if it crashes, you can just say "hey, it's a beta" or something, right? :P

Re:More on multiple desktops

[SuiteSisterMary]

Multiple desktops have been in since, ummm, NT4, at least. Half the stuff that Microsoft 'comes out with' have actually been in the OS for years; just never bothered with. Half the features of NTFS, for example, are still unused; quotas are an example. 'Debuted' in Windows 2000, but were always a part of NTFS; just never bothered with.

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

[tsa]

What I find more important is: is it as configurable as fvwm2? The Microsoft Windows interface has some nasty habits you can't change; hopefully they make it more configurable in the future.

shot's of easter-egg thanking Texas Prez and DOJ

[Locutus]

There's gotta be a nice easter-egg in there saying thanks to all the folks in the Bush administration for all their hard work in getting the DOJ CAVING IN. ;/

Maybe the name "Longhorn" is their tribute, Texas Longhorn is the only "Longhorn" I've heard of.....

Didn't the Texas Longhorns eventually lose out to the current breed because the current breed MATURED quicker? Humm, Linux( the current breed ) and Windows( Longhorn ). Time for history to repeat itself IMHO. :)

LoB

Can you say: confusing!

[obi]

I would define myself as an advanced user, and am using win2k and linux on a daily basis. Because I'm almost running Linux full time, I haven't really felt the need to upgrade to XP, which probably accounts for my unfamilliarity with the new "Luna" UI.

But seeing this almost makes me want to puke. Even though I've been using computers for decades, I wouldn't know where to begin in this UI. There seems to be redundancy all over the place, modes galore, and they seem to show/hide certain tasks/apps/files/settings/menu options completely at random.

I have to admit, maybe if I used it I would like it a bit better. But if I feel "overwhelmed" just by looking at one of the screenshots, how should a newbie user feel. (I seem to remember that when doing usability testing, they ask the subject to first look at the screen without touching anything, and then ask them what they think everything is for)

In contrast, Gnome2 seems to be moving in the right direction by simplifying ("make the simple things easy, the hard ones possible") and unifying as much as possible.

Same thing with MacOS: while the first releases of MacOSX were a step back in usability, they've been repairing the damage with the latest release. At the same time it's a good example of how unification really should work (see the iChat, iSync, iCal, Addressbook, Mail, iTunes integration)

Longhorn and XP seem to like confusion: let's do everything in all the ways everyone in the world might want, and stuff it in one interface. And let's do it all at thesame time too.

the Horror!

Too bad...

[tunabomber]

I keep expecting the MS stock quote to slide accross the screen...

'cause I'd love to see some Microsoft stock prices, leaked out many months ahead of time ; )

I Heard M$ Was Planning to Charge Monthly

[TheWanderingHermit]

I heard a rumor (just that -- I don't have any verification) that M$ was planning to make Longhorn the first OS that wasn't paid for all upfront -- that M$ wanted monthly revenue like AOL. The (questionable) source told me the plans were to make Longhorn work on a monthly fee basis.

Has anyone heard anything about this? I'm not trying to start a rumor -- I'm trying to find out if this one is (as I would expect) ungrounded.

+3 informative? ROFL

[jonr]

Sometimes slashdot amazes me! However, if this is from a Microsoft party, where do I apply?
J.

Sweet yet useless interfaces

[TWX_the_Linux_Zealot]

Yes, Microsoft's UI looks nice. Yes, Microsoft's UI's have looked nice since Windows Chicago Beta 1. The problem is that they don't do enough to the underlying structure to make the OS stable. My Slackware box, kludged together after the original install by upgrading without really following stuff out has had its shell in X running for about ninety days now without any problems. I have the Aqua-like themes for GTK and Sawfish running, and the thing is just sweet as can be in that regard.

I've never had Microsoft OSes, even 2000 or NT, remain up this long, when used as a userland machine.

*smile* I actually encourage Microsoft to continue to write new OSes, every year or two. This causes there to be no less than EIGHT 32bit Microsoft OSes actively in use, from those still running Windows 95 all the way through this new encantation, and with this much fragmentation, it'll only help to cause more and more strife, market confusion, broken 'standards', and non-upgrading by corporations and individuals, which has a significant chance of ultimately being what does Redmond in, rather than weak anti-trust enforcement and lack of acknowledgement by the community at large of the weaknesses of Microsoft's products (viruses, exploits, etc).

Reason why it is fake

[RoundTop-VJAS]

And it is a simple one.

Microsoft never would say Windows Codename Longhorn.

They would say Windows Longhorn. Microsoft has never used the word "Codename" in any documentation nor in any releases in the past. Therefore it is faked.

Re:Reason why it is fake

[cmallinson]

They would say Windows Longhorn. Microsoft has never used the word "Codename" in any documentation nor in any releases in the past. Therefore it is faked.

That is just not true. Early XP Betas were "Codename Whistler", and titled as such in the startup screen.

Re:Reason why it is fake

[cscx]

The original XP had "Codename Whistler" written across the side of the start menu.

Re:shot's of easter-egg thanking Texas Prez and DO

[Locutus]

sure kid, whatever you say... right.

I've been through that state on a motorcycle during a cross-country trip. The only thing that stands out about Texas is that it was very boring, dry, and those darn butterflies made a mess on my forward profile.

BTW, I could care less how the Longhorn is doing or what it looks like. Both from Texas and Redmond. Never seen anything impressive from either but if you're excited about it, don't forget to wash when your done. ;/

Nothing interesting here.

[Twintop]

Yeah, I mean look at the first screen shot, the "The page cannot be displayed" one! It looks just like mine in WinXP! For a second there I thought it was /.ed, but then came to realize these were fakes!

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

[loply]

Hmm really?
I know of a KDE-Wm theme for some time which is almost EXACTLY like the window decoration. The rest IMO looked better in original XP.
The new start menu is definately neater then the bubbly XP one.
My personal oppinion is that the Aqua UI on OSX beats this and all others hands down (even though I dont own a Mac).

Re:KDE-LOOK Got Them First!!!

[Blkdeath]

until one comes up with something other than the generic windowed looking GUI (like a 3D GUI or something).

Like this one?

Winbeta's screenshots are real

[bonch]

http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?Art icleID=27038

Here's the Visual Style, ripped from the beta: http://plex.ike.bz/10.24.02.PlexXP.v.0.7.1.zip

There's even a movie of Longhorn being used...the #winbeta guys have it if you want to see it. Basically, it's WinXP with a new theme ("Plex") and a new filesystem ("WinFS," which everyone turns off because apparently it eats the CPU).

By the way:
"c) This is a BIG giveaway all over the place... The current user settings have font smoothing set to anti-alias, not cleartype or none. Anti-alias text does not come into play for small fonts including 8pt (as can be seen on dektop icons, start bar, etc). However, the new bar on the right IS anti-aliasing these fonts and not only that, but it's not using font hinting (aligning the text to the nearest pixel) which is standard for cleartype or anti-aliasing... it's fake text drawn in a graphics package."

Wrong--I'm running Sideshow, and it always smooths the fonts like that, whether Cleartype is on or not. I can't get to the site /. is linking to; however, the screenshots from Winbeta are REAL.

Major changes I noticed, besides the new theme and Sideshow, is the new Display Properties dialog and a My Hardware dialog. Other than that, this look like what it is--a really early alpha leak for something not due out for another couple of years.

This is actually somewhat old news...I've been running Sideshow on my XP box with the ripped Plex theme for a week now. Visit #winbeta sometime. Sideshow's neat once you figure out how to add new tickets.

pagan temple

[trb]

I wonder how fundamentalist monotheists are going to feel about Microsoft putting a pagan temple (Stonehenge) on the wallpaper of their desktop, see: http://61.175.211.198/vdown/newsinfo/winbeta/2.jpg

here's some more shots.. this may even be real.

[Atilla]

it looks like the finally figured out something to the effect of gkrellm/wharf... jeez only took 'em 5 years.

screenshots (german site)

Mac OSX

[Jeremy Erwin]

MacOSX's "lickable" interface was derided by some graphics designers as "too distracting." Apple responded by adding a grey scale color scheme-- which removed much of the gloss. Will there be a similarly muted interface available in Longhorn?

Re:Mac OSX

[cscx]

There should be. In XP, the "Luna" interface actually runs as a system service called "Themes." Simply go into the services thingee in Control Panel, and stop and disable the Themes service. Whoo hoo, you're back to the speedy Win2k interface, but still with some XP goodies.

More designers (Was: Re:It is /.ed but it's real)

[Wouter Van Hemel]

You know, you're completely right. I have been using Linux/*BSD/... for 5 years almost, no windows whatsoever, but nothing beats the look - or better, the quality of the look of Micro$oft's desktop. It's not really my taste, but I have to admit it looks damn beautiful.

Luckily we (opensource-side) have more quality in software-coding (the performance of some of the more mature programs is just way better - it's not about selling, but about producing good software) and definately more stability. Because we are really lagging behind when it comes to intuitivity and niceness of the GUI... even something as basic as fonts.

The reason it looks so good, is because every little detail has been designed to fit in the look (next to superior anti-aliasing and fonts).

We need more not-geeks using linux. Micro$oft has hundreds (?) of people working on interface design, hiring specialized companies and designers for certain tasks (their core fonts, for instance)... Something that opensource can't do, really. So our only hope is that enough artistic people start helping opensource projects, and reach a common vision of consistent design throughout all of (Gnome's/KDE's/...) software.

The problem is that those arty people are seldom really interested enough in computers to spend their free time designing computerstuff. Or even just to learn to use linux (or a computer in general). Geeks and graphic design... it just doesn't add up (with a few exceptions that confirm the rule). :)

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

[tsa]

I'd love to see the 'click to focus' work only if you click in the title bar, so you can work in a window that is partially covered by other windows. I find that very handy but in MS Windows this is not possible because if you click anywhere in a window it always pops up. Not even TweakUI can change that.

Fake Fake Fake :)

[dark-br]

The screenshots are fake for the following reasons (this is XP with a custom theme and then some hacking around in an image editor)...

For the Setup screen...

a) In the window, horizontal bar at the top doesn't meet the right hand side.
b) Alpha plane gone on setup icon (definitely would NOT happen to one icon and not others).
c) This is a BIG giveaway all over the place... The current user settings have font smoothing set to anti-alias, not cleartype or none. Anti-alias text does not come into play for small fonts including 8pt (as can be seen on dektop icons, start bar, etc). However, the new bar on the right IS anti-aliasing these fonts and not only that, but it's not using font hinting (aligning the text to the nearest pixel) which is standard for cleartype or anti-aliasing... it's fake text drawn in a graphics package.

The sidebar as startmenu screen...
d) Looks nice, but examine the desktop images... no windows in the first one... later on they have images of the windows!

Sidebar on the right...
e) Where did the windows in the desktop image come from in this one ?
f) Aren't those icons on the bar a bit big compared with the later bars?

Display Properties screen (oh my god)...
g) Nice text antialiasing again (hmm)
h) 'You can change the image that appears on your windo...' ooops. Clipped that text a bit. Note this can't happen with the windows API when you have a multi-line text field (using TextOut, etc). Hmm... minor cockup
i) Ah my windows are back in the desktop images (on the sidebar), but now the current window is bigger with a black splodge at the bottom.

My Computer screen...
j) Love the antialiasing on the left, but not in the middle... nice.
k) How fake are the section buttons on the left hand side? Come on guys... you can't flip images horizontally... MS insist on a top left light source. Oh, and your button with the shadow should either have an alpha plane or not... don't do half a job... it really doens't look real.

My Documents...
l) Oooh, Oooh, an anti-aliased dropdown. Fake Fake Fake.

My Pictures..
m) Nice... what happened to Burn CD though? Have MS dropped it now they support DVD burning?
n) Oops, you should have removed the LH.bmp from your My Pictures. Remember you only used it to create the backgroud.

DOS Setup
o) Love it... now your just taking the piss. How did you get the screenshot??? and the 'install Windows Longhorn 2004 using DOS 1985' is excelent. Very funny :-D
p) The URL is superb. ROTFLMAO.

So...

Nice theming... love the sidebar, good use of blending in your graphics package, but FAKE FAKE FAKE.

Great for a laugh though. :-D

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.

Re: Ho buddy

[Gordonjcp]

Just like the crusade against run-on sentences?

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:But I am a victim

[Planesdragon]

Nice argument. But...

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

There are computer shops that make a business selling Linux-based PCs. There are computer shops that will gladly sell you an OS-free PC bundle. And, if you're buying the right kind of computer, even Compaq or Dell will sell it to you sans-Microsoft.

And in any case, it's not your money that MS gets. You pay the OEM, and the money becomes their money--and then they use their money (which used to be yours, but isn't) to pay the debt that installing MS on your PC incurred with them.

(And if you think you might disagree with the license, refuse to buy from an OEM who won't let you see it all before you buy.)

Re:But I am a victim

[walt-sjc]

Oh please. The TRUTH is that MOST (98% or so) configurations are ONLY availble with the required purhase of Windows. Some manufacturers offer a very limited number of models that come without Windows, and even fewer of those are laptops. Until you are able to choose ANY pc and "unbundle" Windows, there is a problem (MS Tax.) The problem is compunded by the fact that the "license" is "tied" to the machine and I can't sell it off to someone else. The reason for this is that MS has forced companies to sign anti-competitive agreements.

Blah blah blah "refuse to buy from X unless X" yeah right. That's not the reality of the world, especially in light of the fact that MS is a monopoly. Licenses change CONSTANTLY. Sometimes (such as the Win2000 SP3 EULA) change things out from under you AFTER you purchase the product. Before you say that it's optional, it's NOT optional if you want security fixes (which are for all practical purposes required.) Kinda like buying a car and being forced to agree not to say anything bad about the manufacturer in order to get a safety-related recall problem fixed. While you can choose to buy another brand of car and drive on every road that any other brand of car can, the same is NOT the case with computer operating systems where MS has a monopoly.

Re:But I am a victim

[walt-sjc]

This just isn't the case. The TRUTH is that the contracts MS forces OEM's to agree to require Windows on ALL computers of a specific model. What this means is that OEM's have to have DIFFERENT models if they want to offer computers without Windows. This is expensive to do, so they only offer a very limited set of models for those running other operating systems.

This is the anti-competitive behavior we are talking about. It's the illegal stuff they are doing to maintain their monopoly. Unfortunately we have a totally clueless legal system and a corrupt DOJ.

The former MS negotiator for Dell is a family friend, and he had some VERY interesting things to say about this topic.

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.

Re:interesting....

[cscx]

Wrong, my IE 6.0 in XP SP1 is dated Copyright 2001.

Re:A beowulf cluster!?

[cscx]

It's no surprise that I've been on Linux for years.

And it's also no surprise from your post that you're a complete fucking idiot. Thanks for playing, hoser.

Re:They stole my ducky!

[WebMasterJoe]

It's real... the same duck is in Windows XP too! That's some good old MS innovation...

Longhorn's UI... Blehh

[Aqua OS X]

I don't know about that UI. Everything seems slightly off and not quite right. Kind of like those car-audio or sun glasses booths at a flee market. No doubt, Microsoft is trying... however they don't seem to put a lot of love or thought into an UI design.

I can't understand why anyone earth anyone would think this user interface is functional. Basic file browsing windows have been converted into a freak'n sideshow. Windows have a top toolbar, a side bar, header graphics with shortcuts, popup menus, etc etc. Heck, the "My Pictures" window, by default, is setup to look more complex then Photoshop LE. A desktop window should -not- look like this. It is a poor use of work space, it's difficult to read, and functions are not properly prioritized. Moreover, options to turn-off this horrible UI clutter are practically hidden from novice users.

And then there is the quick launch bar and the start menu. Those things are disasters by default. Things are not prioritized properly and they both handle similar (if not identical) tasks. It schizophrenic.

Yeah, what is with these colors?

[spitzak]

Seriously, both the Mac and XP are starting to look like some of the more offensive WindowMaker things from 5 years ago. I thought these guys were professionals? It looks like a bunch of geeks from their mom's basement took over.

Win95 and 98 were very well designed. They cleaned up the interface a lot to avoid distraction from the task at had, made everything subdued and monochrome, and made everything *small*. They managed to fix mistakes that have existed in Windows/Unix/Mac for years (such as extra lines between the window "border" and the contents, complex decoration around menus, and relying on pictures instead of text to identify iconized windows). And in case nobody remembers, Windows 95 scared the s**t out of Unix vendors, who up until then were rather confident in their superiority of GUI design. Oddly enough, MicroSoft, despite their power, is not scaring anybody with design now.

I think to the average person, about to throw down over $1000 for this thing, that they want to see a professional looking and clean and efficient appearance. They don't want it to look like it was made by Fischer Price. MicroSoft has lost their mind, or has become way too complacent in their monopoly position.

Re:Yeah, what is with these colors?

[Jeremy Erwin]

And in case nobody remembers, Windows 95 scared the s**t out of Unix vendors, who up until then were rather confident in their superiority of GUI design.

Superiority? I seem to recall that the Window 3.1 interface had a lot in common with Motif. Window95 finally brought smaller widgets to Windows (imitating, in some respects, the Macintosh), but it also continued that dreary grey colour scheme.

Nextstepish/WindowMakerish

[Billly Gates]

Did anyone else besides me see any WIndowmaker like ui's in some of the menu's. The wizards in XP are annoying and longhorn uses them even more then XP did. I would rather just go to the control panel and manually select what I do instead of click an endless maze of menu's.

I find the start menu very nextish and I wonder if Microsoft borrowed some gui ideas from it. I like the panels but I hate the wizards. Windows2k is my favorite gui. Highly customizable and not annoyingly intrusive. The only thing I miss from the unix world is seperate desktops or panes. I can't believe redhat took them out of rh 8. They rock.

However I do not know Microsofts stance on drm and pallidium with longhorn. I assume pallidium will run in software mode if you use a non pallidium computer. Its easy to encrypt something. I admit seperating memory address spaces is impossible but Microsoft's goal is to prevent fair use at all costs to satify its own as well as hollywoods needs. If I rip an audio track with wma in Longhorn, will it be encrypted by default?

Get the video here!!!!

[GnomeKing]

www.beginners.org.uk/LH3683PreviewLong-WiNBETA.avi

dull

[g4dget]

I don't see anything interesting in the screen shots. There are still huge, confusing menus and hundreds of icons scattered illogically around the screen--just like Windows XP.

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

[walt-sjc]

Not to be a troll, but what I REALLY want to know is what is going on under the hood. What more has MS done on DRM, corporate spyware, "activation" copy protection crap (Will I have to call MS if I upgrade my mouse now?) etc. Let's see the new EULA too.

From an IT standpoint, I want to know what MS has done on "trustworthy computing." Will it continue to be virus / worm prone? Rather then spend their time making the system "pretty" and adding more features nobody cares about, MS needs to secure the OS and make it more reliable.

requirements?

[gunleik]

I see on one of the screenshots (system properties) it say it's running with 512MB RAM. It scares me, i think it's minimum requirement.

What exactly is so new?

[theolein]

Apart from the somewhat Apple like logo (all white) and a rearranged start menu taking up even more screen real estate than the start menu in XP I don't see that many changes. The rendering engine is basically the same (If you look at the aliased -jaggy- rounded corners of the windows you'll see that there is still no built in alpha compositing). The tasks are nice for newbies and irritating for practiced users. When MS makes some real changes in the interface, such as cleaning up the current mess of no less than four seperate windows in order to set up the network, then I'll agree that real change has happened in the UI.

Re:Newsflash - NO screenshots at Icrontic.

[kubrick]

Fortunately, the net is global and tech-critic.com is registered to some guys in Australia. With some luck the standard US-law based cease-and-desist letter does not bear any significance down under.

Through the wonders of global capitalism, we here in Australia actually have our own Microsoft subsidiary, and I bet they even employ some lawyers as well...

Whoa - Microsoft is Unhappy!

[Jouster]

Check out the quote at the bottom of this page: "SCREENSHOTS REMOVED DUE TO MICROSOFT REQUEST".

I suppose using the Print Screen key is now a circumvention device or something....

Jouster

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.

"The same as"

[Inoshiro]

Why should they have to have a complete separate OEM and computer configuration when you only want the hardware sans OS?

Oh, because Microsoft is a monopoly and abusing its monopoly powers. Government regulations exist to curb these anti-competitive behaviours, because they hurt the economy.

Flawed argument Re:But I am a victim

[Joey7F]

Supply and Demand assumes that you have a fair and free market. Microsoft has a monopoly therefore they can dictate terms more forcefully than if were required to compete.

I am sure tons of people would buy a computer without an operating system if it saved them money.

Unrelated: The screenshots look pretty good, but I think some of the themes from KDE3 (I noticed something that said Desktop 1, so I guess MS realizes the benefit of virtual desktops) are just as nice looking.

--Joey

Monopoly.

[Inoshiro]

Have you taken Economics at all? A monopoly is a special case. There are certain rules that monopolies need follow, that do not apply to normal busineses. Note how I do not complain about Apple, because they are not a monopoly.

Re:Longhorn BSOD

[walt-sjc]

Yeah, windows has improved it's speed. It crashes so fast it doesn't even get a chance to display the BSOD anymore. It just freezes instead.

Where to start..

[Inoshiro]

" Pareto efficient economy, monopolists must be heavily regulated. Microsoft however, just doesn't fit the bill. "

Go read the findings of fact. Judge Jackson found them to be a monopoly. Monopolies do exist without the explicit permission of a government (Standard Oil). The market is best served by innovation based around a set of of open standards (IEE1284, for example, and the printer companies). MS uses the fact that it is a monopoly to leverage their proprietary standards, forcing all companies to kow-tow to them, rather than finding the natural market balance. Once one company has enough power to dictate what the market does on such a level, it is a monopoly. Just like Sasktel, who dictates exactly how much internet access costs in Saskatchewan.

By abreviating MS as "M$" you make my case.

Re:I think you just ended it.

[Inoshiro]

"Here's the deal, Ino. You clearly hold to a value system at odds with mine. You think that my use of "M$" as a reference to Microsoft is in some way a put-down, when it's not."

No, I just think it's something only a 14-year-old would do. They have a proper name. Using M$ instead of MS or Microsoft is like writing C U L8R instead of see you later. The moment you try and talk to me seriously that way, I just get a picture of you cosplaying some TNG character.

"You also believe that intellectual property should not be privatized, but instead offered free to all."

No, I don't. I never even said that.

Read these sentences:
I tried to buy a computer without Windows. If there is a market demand for it, Toshiba should be selling them without Windows. I demanded such a laptop, but was unable to find one. Why, when I was willing to pay for one, is this possible?

That is what I have been trying to get across to you. Feel free to replicate my experiment any time to verify how you can't buy a laptop without Windows, even though people will pay for them!

But I'll give you congratulations for this conversation. Not only do you not have an understanding of what is going on in my head, you're so set on proving you're right to someone who doesn't care (that'd be me), that you'll misinterpret what I wrote to twist it towards your own ends.

They didn't exist a year ago.

[Inoshiro]

Unfortunately.

I should also mention that I've yet to find a store in the city that sells laptops without Windows. Perhaps you should find a brick and mortar store, since the shipping + duty for any machine from the US (assuming I do not somehow manage to have you smuggle me such a machine) would be more than enough for me to move to Hawaii on.

Tax wise

[Inoshiro]

They add on enough to make it cheaper to drive down to the US, because I would be charged 14% taxes ontop of any fees.