Slashdot Mirror


New Longhorn Screenshots Leaked

Badgerguy writes "The Supersite for Windows has some shiney-blue looking leaked screenshots of LongHorn. The new screenshots of the 'Aero' interface mainly seem to be concerned with Digital Media integration - which has become deeper still. A new 'SyncManager' screenshot is up there (copying of iSync?) as well as some pictures of LongHorn prototype hardware, which looks like a cross between a desktop PC / Notebook / Tablet PC. "

61 of 1,037 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong direction by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The interface seems to be coming along very well, it looks nice. It also appears as though they are going to integrate the most common desktop applications into one panel (IM, address book, email, etc). It is, however, all ultimately irrelevant. User interface within Windows has been at acceptable to good levels since Windows 95. They aren't going to win any more of the desktop market by making it look fancier. Microsoft should instead be focusing completely on security, performance, interoperability, stability, and flexibility - you know, all of the things that are allowing Linux to kill Microsoft on the server side. In other words, they should attack the competition by improving the things that they are bad at. Drastically lowering prices wouldn't hurt, either.

    **For the Windows users that are going to inevitably say "Well my XP box never crashed and I don't have to reboot for a week! I play mad gamez and it stays good! So it's stable, you are just a open source zealot!", just shut up. When the big kids talk about "stability", they mean that a server remains stable indefinately while performing multiple critical tasks. If one task fails, the OS is capable of maintaining peak levels of performance despite the failure of one component/application/process/whatever. Not having to reboot your Win2K Server for 20 or so days when all the box was doing was providing file sharing and running a small Active Directory domain for a measly 100-200 users is not "stable". That kind of stability was surpassed by UNIX over 20 years ago (and every other mainstream OS since, as well). This post was first.

    1. Re:Wrong direction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Well my XP box never crashed and I don't have to reboot for a week! I play mad gamez and it stays good! So it's stable, you are just a open source zealot!"

      But I thought windows boxes were for only playing games :)

    2. Re:Wrong direction by brundlefly · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Microsoft should instead be focusing completely on security, performance, interoperability, stability, and flexibility - you know, all of the things that are allowing Linux to kill Microsoft on the server side.

      Who says they aren't? UI design and security are not mutually exclusive.

      These are leaked screenshots, not final feature checklists. You are grinding your axe at the wrong moment, pal.

    3. Re:Wrong direction by Meffan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are these pictures even real? looking at the site (I actually RTFA) the blurb is:


      Here, for the first time, is a gallery of UI prototypes that I believe accurately portrays the "Aero" user interface in Longhorn.


      So are these leaked screens, an accurate estimate, or a wild 'Guesstimate'?

      --
      I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams.
    4. Re:Wrong direction by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Funny
      User interface within Windows has been at acceptable to good levels since Windows 95.

      *blink*

      This is almost like hearing someone say, "Look at the sleek and sexy lines of that Honda Element."

      Yeah. Car analogy. Deal with it.

      --
      --- Ban humanity.
    5. Re:Wrong direction by trompete · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are totally right. Mod parent up please.
      Windows machines are best used as gaming machines. The only way I ever hook mine up to the internet is if it is behind my trusty DSL router, which has protected me time and time again.
      If I didn't play games, I would have bought an I-Book or a G-4 a couple years ago.

    6. Re:Wrong direction by slipgun · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Server version is WORMWOOD

      And the Advanced Server version is Screwtape?

      --
      SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    7. Re:Wrong direction by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is not a troll. A rant, maybe.

      Look. MS Win\2003 and future versions contain public-keys for encryption, for which the licensed user (not owner) holds no corresponding private-key. Who holds the private keys? Microsoft, for sure - and whoever they escrow to at Three Letter Agency.

      Sony Pictures may well hold private-keys, distributing the pub-key to you by use of MS's APIs in a software installer. The implications of this is that your computer cannot be trusted by its user.

      Oh, and the worm comments seem like flamebait? The DCom-RPC vulnerability is YEARS old in the code - 1997. Never caught by the people who had access and ownership of the source. Not after bringing in special tools for reviewing code last year, not after a 5-month security related delay for review of 2003 Server. This is an OBVIOUS place to look for flaws, being RPC, and automated tools for checking buffer code is not rocket science.

      The newest (of many) problems in the IE use of the OBJECT tag was so downplayed in the MS announcement yesterday, that I have hardly heard a mention. This is not a joke to leave unpatched, and it is related to IE ignoring RFC compliance on 7-bit MIME-type headers, and weakness in the mechanism for defining "zones".
      See if you can tell that this announcement:
      http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin /MS03-032.asp
      relates to this disclosure by eEye:
      http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Advisories/AD200 30820.html
      You think that Linux or Solaris or whatnot suffers equally? A regular user of an account on the box cannot establish the trust policy for code executed outside of his own shell.

      We can go on for pages and pages in this vein - instead just manage to look through the relevant list-archives for Full-Disclosure and Incidents, etc...

      Windows is a little, dirty-toilet OS.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  2. Mirror by inertia187 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even as Slashdot Subscriber, the site was slow/unresponsive. I'm surprised Slashdot people are that interested in Longhorn. So anyway, here's a mirror.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
  3. God thats ugly by splatter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does anyone else find this new interface Microsoft is leaning towards as being a eye sore? God the huge buttons and bright colors.. I thought XP had some ugly colors and fonts.

    yikes

    DP

    --
    "(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
  4. Toyish? by s.a.rankin · · Score: 5, Funny

    As each new Windows release comes out, I'm surprised to see the new release looks even more like a toy than the last release. What's next, a dancing Hello Kitty?

    1. Re:Toyish? by chazzf · · Score: 5, Funny

      Great god man, don't give them ideas!

      --
      No statement is true, not even this one.
    2. Re:Toyish? by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There is nothing new here so compelling ~.
      There is one thing: you don't have a choice from here on out thanks to Microsoft's Windows Desktop Product Life Cycle Support and Availability Policies for Consumers. Once XP end of lifes there are no more activations, so if your computer crashes or you upgrade enough of your hardware then you have an expensive coaster instead of an OS CD.

      Think you'll upgrade then? What about your mom?

      If you are on NT or W2k, you have some time, but consider that although NT EOLs in June, 2004 and Wk2 EOLs in March, 2008, it is doubtful that patches will be written for W2K for much longer--NT is dead as far as patches are concerned; anyone who still runs NT can go pound sand for all the support they're going to get.

      Ching, ching! Bling, bling! -- that's the sound of money flowing into Bill Gate$'s pockets.

      --
      Yeah, right.
  5. Spelling error by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone else notice that in one of the pics it says "Here's room for text but I don't thing we need it."?

    Did Microsoft hire a Slashdot editor?

  6. That's some hardware it's running on by aliens · · Score: 5, Funny

    Talk about bloat. One of the screenshot diplaying what I would think is a fancy Device Manager has the computer listed as a 80Ghz Xeon with 20GB of RAM.

    Is that what's going to be required to run Longhorn? ::)

    (P.S. I know it's just what the developer typed in as a placeholder)

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  7. its a good thing by mattkime · · Score: 4, Funny

    its a good thing buttons, images, and text are all getting larger. i've been far too satisfied with my 19" display.

    finally, and end to the tyranny of productive screen usage!

    --
    Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
  8. Chewbacca Defence by schwep · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Update the GUI and people will forget about the insecurities and DRM being pushed down their throats...

  9. Neat by Rombuu · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now we know what KDE 5.0 will look like.

    --

    DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
  10. Let's see here... by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bigger icons and bigger text on a shiney blue background. Reminds me of Gnome, which reminds me of KDE, which reminds me of OS X. At least with Bob they had true innovation going for them. Bring back Bob!!!

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
  11. Cool by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whether you like the interface aesthetics or not (big deal, you can switch 'em back, no doubt, just like I do in XP), there are some nifty looking new features I saw before the site just got too slow to keep looking.

    I notice in the audio properties box, you could dynamically mix the volume level of any running application - that's friggin cool. Now I can watch a movie or something and not have every IRC notification in the background blare over what I'm watching, I can turn it down.

    Oh well, bash away, I'm sure you all hate it for completely non-technical reasons.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  12. TiVo by Gzip+Christ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Doesn't this screenshot look a heck of a lot like the TiVo logo? I thought it actually was the TiVo logo when I saw the thumbnail and worried for a second that TiVo had sold its soul. Microsoft might want to rethink that screen, though, if they don't want a trademark fight.

  13. Worst...scheme...EVER! by siskbc · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Does anyone else find this new interface Microsoft is leaning towards as being a eye sore? God the huge buttons and bright colors.. I thought XP had some ugly colors and fonts.

    I know they have really shitty design interface people, but would someone, for the love of god, tell them that pastels are really bad for eys strain over significant time intervals (or with that ugly shit, 10 seconds)? Please, ditch the pastels. I'm NOT a machead, but Apple's done a good job of picking colors with slightly lower saturation levels, with the result being a very pleasing interface. WinXP (and evidently this crap) make me want to slit my wrists.

    Also, what's with the 800 pixel menu bars? Were these screenshots taken from a computer for the legally blind or will those using windows really have to look at that shit?

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  14. Does Stability Sell by FortKnox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honestly, if MS released a brand new operating system that looked identicle to XP, but was just ultra secure and ultra stable, would it sell?

    Or would managers and housewives just say "its the same thing!"
    Plus you want to keep pushing the GUI that made it popular in the first place. Why give Linux a chance to gain in the desktop market?

    **For Linux Zealots that are going to inevitably say "Well if MS is going to sell secure and stable OS everyone would want a copy!, just shut up. When the big kids talk about "selling software" we are talking the major buyers, here. Which aren't necessarily the tech saavy.

    Yes, that last paragraph was an insult to the parents obvious troll-paragraph. I run a SuSE server and an XP box. Both have been up the same length of time without a crash.

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  15. Aero the chocolate bar by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Funny

    The OS with a GUI just like its security...full of holes.

  16. Huh? by numbski · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You talk like there's a *wrong* time to grind your axe when I comes to M$. :P

    I have to agree with the parent though. They are moving toward higher media integration, which is copying Apple to the hilt. Interoperability and security have ALWAYS been low on their hit list. They don't care if what they make works with anyone else, because they have so much market saturation that they can more or less say "screw the rest of you".

    *sigh* I always have to explain to people that 90% of the OS's out there are great, standards driven, and work well together...there's all sorts of free software out there, that you can even modify the source code to make work the way you want.

    The problem is, Close to 90% or more of computers are running Windows instead. I still have some people I encounter that have never heard of the concept of a computer without windows, and get downright defensive of the concept of a computer WITHOUT windows. :(

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    1. Re:Huh? by JWW · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bullshit, the DCOM vunlerability should never have been in there in the first place, it was absolutely shoddy coding on their part. At my company the patch was not through testing yet, and I don't blame them for it either.

      I understand that in your little world administrators have nothing better to do but sit and wait for the latest patch and then immediatly go install it, oh and with no ill affects either.

      In the real world many companies have half the IT staff (or less) than they used to and they're overworked even before having to install patches on EVERY machine.

      The exploits in Windows were DEFECTS in the product. My company pays millions to put that product on thousands of machines, and it was defective. I plan on asking IT higher ups if we are planning any legal action against Microsoft for selling defective products.

      When Ford gets sued because Crown Victorias explode when they are rear ended by another car, Ford doesn't get out of the lawsuits because "someone else ran into the car" they pay through the nose because their gas tanks are defective. Microsoft deserves the same treatment in the courts. Its the only true way they will EVER take security seriously.

    2. Re:Huh? by Eric+Ass+Raymond · · Score: 4, Informative
      The exploits in Windows were DEFECTS in the product.

      And how would Linux, FreeBSD or even OpenBSD be different in this sense? Do you think that they are secure out of box? No. Install a vanilla RedHat, expose it to the net and you're just asking for trouble. You'll still have to up2date and then "wait for the latest patch and then immediately go and install it" with all the possible ill effects that might bring about.

      Microsoft deserves the same treatment in the courts. Its the only true way they will EVER take security seriously.

      The fact is that software engineering cannot be compared to nuts-and-bolts engbineering because of its complexity. Your example is thus void.

    3. Re:Huh? by jokell82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Though frankly, they still dont have a decent competitor for everyday desktop computing, which is a shame.

      WRT Linux, I'm inclined to agree. But Mac OS X is way more than a "decent competitor." In fact, I feel it surpasses Windows in every aspect of desktop computing. The *only* thing that Windows has over OS X is games. Other than that it can't hold a candle to the user experience that Mac OS X offers.

      Oh, and I thought this even when 10.0 was released, and switched to Mac because of it.

      --
      I dunno who it is
      but it prolly is fhqwhgads.
    4. Re:Huh? by JWW · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Software engineering can't be compared to nuts-and-bolts engineering because it doesn't WANT to be compared to nuts-and-bolts engineering.

      It deemed to hard to do true engineering on software. Thats bunk, coders just want to be "artistic" and forget engineering.

      You don't see Fords engineers going "but building a car is really complex, cut us some slack."

      My example is not void, Microsoft just doesn't want to work on engineering their software enough.

      Oh and the remedy should be based on what you pay for the software, therefore your including Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD is void.

      BTW: the Enterprise version of Linux that are sold for a price should live up to this level.

    5. Re:Huh? by JWW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A building isn't a car either, but its still engineered.

      This is just a cop-out of software engineers.

      One of the main reasons that software is not truly engineered is that everyone makes up their own specifications. When you look at RFC's they look very much like engineering specs, and older technonogy like TCP has engineering like specifications too.

      Now Microsofts problem was in the implementing of DCOM over TCP/IP and the security they used. Its their own specification, and not subject to proposal and being reviewed as the above mentioned RFC's are. Sure other protocols and implementations have had holes and exploits, but new RFCs can then be written and the hole fixed. This is exactly the same as saying the bridge design used for the Tacoma Narrows bridge will never be used again.

      But it is that propietary code Microsoft writes and hides and does not publish full specifications for that is making their OS vulnerable to worms. It is their defect, they should own up to responsibilty for it.

      And yes, if they did publish full specs for their system calls and interfaces, or God forbid, released their code for all to review, I would cut them more slack.

  17. Screen Real Estate by Synesthesiatic · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From a quick look at the screenshots, it looks like the interface has a lot of whitespace taking up screen real estate.

    In particular, look at the one in the bottom-left of the first batch. It's a simple autoplay dialog, but it takes up 640x492! There's no excuse for that kind of waste.

    I know I'm probably in the minority, since I'm not one of those people that maximizes EVERYTHING (my roommie runs IE maximized at 1400x1050!), and I'm not opposed to a little eye candy, but why should a simple dialog with all of five choices take up that much space?

  18. One question... by mcgroarty · · Score: 5, Funny
    After looking at those pictures --

    Any word on how they'll avoid a Fischer-Price look-and-feel lawsuit?

  19. Simplified UI by Gilmoure · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Reminds me of the sort of front end you'd see on lab lockdown software in an elementary school. How come closed source OS developers (MS and Apple) don't want to provide variety to their GUI? Why does it fall to third party folks to write hacks that let you customize a system. Yes, 95% of regular users will never think beyond their desktop pic and screen saver but for the rest of us...make it an admin thing or something. I don't care what you have to do to keep grandma from fscking up her machine, just don't lock the rest of us down.

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  20. Win over? by sterno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They aren't going to win any more of the desktop market by making it look fancier.
    They don't have to win over anybody? They just need to avoid losing them. Ultimately that will most likely happen through continuing to make people need windows rather than choose it on its merits.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  21. Re:CPU/memory intensive by devnull17 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The UI won't be CPU-intensive at all. Like OS X, Longhorn is completely 3D. Everything is a textured surface to be rendered by the GPU. However, the requirements for graphics cards in Longhorn were released a while ago, and they're pretty steep. (DirectX 9-compliant devices will be required for most of the better effects; DX7 devices for minimal functionality.)

  22. Yea, it's called Aqua from Mac OSX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you say that Microsoft can't improve on the interface of Windows, then you have certainly not used the interfaces available on MacOS (for any version, not just X). It's a heck of a lot easier to navigate around MacOS, and I don't say this out of experience; I say this because Apple specifies a Human Interface Guideline that Microsoft does not have for Windows (even Microsoft has to follow the HIG when they make Office v.X). Everything is placed in a tree-like heirarchy that is easier (compared to Windows' interface) to find things in, especially if you haven't had experience with the interface. I personally still use the classic view in Windows 2000 and XP, just because their new interface is NOT better than the old one. Their changing the interface only makes it worse and bloated, which requires more exploration and getting used to than it should be. With MacOS, nothing needs getting used to. If you want to change something, you just follow the yellow brick road. It's as simple as that. Microsoft has yet to make that step into improving the simplicity of their interface. You don't complain only because you've used it since Windows 95 and classic view is an option that you can find after having getting used to the insanity of the placement of functions/options like that.

    1. Re:Yea, it's called Aqua from Mac OSX by schnell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everything is placed in a tree-like hierarchy that is easier (compared to Windows' interface) to find things in, especially if you haven't had experience with the interface.

      I'm a rabid OS X fan. I significantly prefer OS X's look and feel to WinXP, and I agree that Microsoft has failed to dictate sensible UI conventions to its developers. So many Windows apps seem to be duking it out for the "worst interface of all time" title (currently held by the main menu screens of Madden NFL 2004).*

      However, I have to say that this is a pretty damn clever UI for non tech-savvy folks (which is the vast majority of them). Contextual menus are provided for each piece of hardware, allowing inexperienced users to visually identify their system components and then click on them to bring up service or configuration options. Assuming that this view can be hidden for more experienced users, I think it's a significant improvement over current desktop metaphors for beginners (even with OS X, my parents would never know to click on the Apple menu to find system preferences if I didn't tell them).

      It pains me to say this about Microsoft, but this is an innovative (as far as I can tell) interface. Even though it breaks conventions (bad), it seems to be leaps beyond anything that Apple has done recently in terms of "can your grandmother use this?" user interfaces (good). If nothing else, it gives Apple some real competition in the UI department (and some much-needed "grandma-centric" inspiration to Gnome and KDE).

      * Yes, it's worse than QuickTime 4.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    2. Re:Yea, it's called Aqua from Mac OSX by Jenova_Six · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I say this because Apple specifies a Human Interface Guideline that Microsoft does not have for Windows

      What are you talking about? Microsoft most definitely does have a user interface guideline for developers, with very defined rules for the "look and feel" of a Windows application.

    3. Re:Yea, it's called Aqua from Mac OSX by Seanasy · · Score: 4, Informative
      Example - how do you stop the dock from zooming in and out? "Right click" on it? No. Control panel? Don't think so.

      I think so. System Preferences > Dock. Uncheck "Maginification." The Apple menu access to that setting is for convenience. OS X isn't perfect, nothing is perfect. But, that's a bad example.

      ...for instance, you cannot browse the control panel applets in the finder.

      I like this and it makes sense to me. Plus, when you open System Preferences, every preferences applet is right there in front of you. But, I'm confused as hell by the XP control panel. Everytime I've tried to use it, it seems to throw barriers in fron of me to get at what I want.

    4. Re:Yea, it's called Aqua from Mac OSX by proteinaceous · · Score: 5, Informative

      Maybe you need to play with a Mac a little more.

      "Example - how do you stop the dock from zooming in and out? "Right click" on it? No."

      YES!!! Right click (or ctrl-left click for the one-button mouse) on the dock (not an application or file in the dock) and a menu pops up. Click "Turn Magnification Off". Admittedly, it's a bit tricky to click the dock without clicking on an application/file...but it does work just as you described it should work.

      "Control panel? Don't think so."

      YES!!! That's another way to do it. The Mac equivalent of Control Panel is "System Preferences". Within System Preferences is "Dock". I'm not sure how much more intuitive it can get.

      "Try clicking on a broken X11 app link some time. Does it tell you it's broken? No - it just fades in a nice question mark. Of course if you don't know what that means"

      It means it's a broken link. I don't think that's very unintuitive...but I guess that's my opinion. Do other OS's give better info in a similar situation aside from that fact that it can't find the linked file?

      "There are lots of little things like that, that in my opinion make an OS that is pretty straightforward and predictable"

      You may have a different opinion after playing with it a little more. I "switched" about 6 months ago and have been amazed how much more intuitive it is (among other things). Admittedly, some things are different than Windows, but that doesn't make it less intuitive.

  23. Leaked Screenshots???? by TheLostStooge · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nowhere in the article does it say these are actually leaked screenshots. It does say "Here, for the first time, is a gallery of UI prototypes that I believe accurately portrays the "Aero" user interface in Longhorn" I don't think we should qualify this as actual leaked screenshots.

    --
    .adios/losers ~snake
    1. Re:Leaked Screenshots???? by leifm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Intentionally leaked screenshots are the only thing Paul Thurrott is good for. If you actually read his stuff you get quotes like this:

      "Windows Me (as in the dreadful, "get to know Me" tagline)--is a lame duck technologically, but it offers enough reliability improvements and new features for me to recommend it heartily to most Windows 9x users"

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
  24. IP by superdan2k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nice to see Microsoft jumping on the "we can use those BeOS icons" bandwagon. (Look carefully.)

    --
    blog |
  25. Changing the look and feel by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will they be changing the look and feel of the Blue Screen of Death (tm)? Maybe it'll become the Pastel Screen of Discomfort.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  26. I Disagree by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I ask her how things work on the computer she has now, she's used to XP and having almost everything explained in simple, child-like steps. If I ask her to save something "to the hard drive" she doesn't know what this means.

    And to non-geeks, this is a bad thing. To the rest of the world, it's not a big deal. They don't really care if their hard drive has 8MB of cache and runs at 7200RPMs. They don't care how much space is on their hard drive as long as they don't get a scary message saying they've run out of it.

    And they certainly don't mind getting told, step-by-step, how to do certain tasks.

    The reason that "leaked" screenshots of the new version of Windows gets posted on /. is because, no matter how much we try to deny it, we probably envy the strides made in UI that just aren't being done in Linux (yet).

    Case in point: you're 13 year old sister doesn't need to know about xcopy or directory structures or file trees in order to save or retrieve files. And better yet, a grandma can do the same thing and while we see them as childlike step-by-step shortfalls, the simple fact is that UI brings computer efficiency to the masses. Is it as efficient as we are (or can be)? Of course not. But it lets them use something that they had not been able to use before (I'm speaking mainly of the grandmas at this point).

    Either way, I think that dumbing down is a great thing. Because this gives users a choice: You can go step by step and make something work. Or, if you're curious, or if you're a Power User (tm), you can turn that off and work with more control and finesse than thought possible. I know the Aero interface will be disabled the instant

    I install the newest Windows, but at least it's there for those who need it.

    And those are the people you seem to have forgotten in your posting.

  27. Re:Dumbing Down by micromoog · · Score: 5, Insightful
    When I was 13 I was ultra-1337. Now my kid sister isn't, and I blame Microsoft.

    Maybe, unlike you, she just doesn't give a shit?

  28. bigger buttons == easier by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Funny

    Windows is getting easier and easier to use .. in fact, by the time the "Play My Music" button is the size of your monitor, theres no way you could mistakeningly hit the wrong button!

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  29. Re:Dumbing Down by Miguelito · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...that leaves those of us who know how things work under the hood in a separate world."

    Well, look at it this way... it's job security.

    Not that I want to spend my days fixing windows machines (I get enough frustrations with just fixing my family's systems). I'm a Unix SysAdmin.. but of course to everyone else, I can fix all computers (and sometimes they think, anything electronic). Sure, I usually can fix all their computer woes (which almost always turn out to be windows problems) but when it comes to failing hardware they still think it's a simple fix... when, in reality, it might be extremely hard to narrow down and will likely require buying replacement parts.

    The tired analogy of comparing us admins to car mechanics and the like is becoming more and more accurate. My brother-in-law happens to be a mechanic. We're almost opposites to each other in respect to cars and computers.. I know computers intimately, and fix theirs, or help add new things when they need it. He knows everything about cars and fixes mine when it needs it. Neither of us knows anything about the other's area of expertise. Works out for us in the end.

    --
    - My favorite error message: xscreensaver, running on an old Sparc 5 w/ 8bit color: bsod: Couldn't allocate color Blue
  30. Re:Dumbing Down by Delphiki · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's not that people are stupid. That's an incredible arrogant and geek centric way to look at it. Get over yourself. They don't want to have to know how computers work because they shouldn't have to know how computers work. They should just be able to use one. It's called specialization. if everyone had to go spend all of their time learning about everything they needed in their life and building their own house and growing their own food and so forth, nothing would get done. Instead they should be able to do whatever it is that they do and have those things made as accessible as possible by whoever's job it is to do those things.

    UI simplification is a good thing. A very good thing. A lot of people loathe computers, because of software which was built on the mentality that it's not that hard to learn, so people can just read the manual and figure it out.

    People should be able to buy computers, use them, and find the experience enjoyable. That means they shouldn't have to worry about reading the manual. Apple and Microsoft both understand this. The geek community and especially the open source community need to catch on now.

    If I go to buy a steak, I shouldn't need to know how to birth a cow, I should just have enough money to pay for the steak, and maybe an understanding of how to use eating utensils.

    --

    Feel free to mod me "-1 - Angry Jerk".

  31. Re:Great! Wizards everywhere by kisrael · · Score: 4, Funny

    Gawd, yeah.
    I REALLY long for the old behavior of Ctrl-F bringing up a useful little search in its own window, not taking over my current explorer window. It's stupid how many clicks that adds to my everyday user experience.

    You know, I NEVER want a sidebar appearing in explorer, file or internet or otherwise. Like when I hit ctrl-F on a page that hasn't finished loading, it pulls up a useless OEM-branded websearch...a chance for all kinds of retarded branding and useles portalling when all I want is MY FUCKING SEARCHBOX. (which is braindamaged anyway, pulling up random previous searches. Considering that the Address box and other autocompletes are pretty good, I'm appalled at what crap the ctrl-F search is. It must be some form of primitive protoDRM.)

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  32. And we thought XP was bad.. by Ogerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't use Windows, but several of my less geeky friends do. Just about every one of them has stated at one point or another that they hate the "new interface" of XP--especially Explorer. It's not surprising to me. Microsoft keeps designing interfaces that, by default, hide more and more information from the user while adding chubby new graphics and context sidebars. I get asked questions like "how do I make it just show all the files and directories on my hard drive?" Longhorn seems to be a step further in the direction of hiding more details to make the UI not user-friendly, but rather idiot-friendly. It may be more immediately useful to someone who's never touched a computer before, but it certainly isn't always efficient for the typical user. And if you look at those stupid interface studies that supposedly compare XP to KDE, you'll notice that most of them study near-illiterate users.

    Chalk up yet another reason to convince people and businesses to switch to Linux / Free Software.

  33. Re:Dumbing Down by John_Booty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hmm. First of all, I'm a programmer; I can create software, I work primarily in Windows but I'm at least "adequate" with *nix for basic things, and I'm comfortable with the command line because I'm 27 and while that's not very old, I *have* been using computers since the 8-bit days.

    And I don't really like your stance that "simplicity and convenience" is a bad thing. At least not, in and of itself. I think that, ideally, a computer should be easy to use as a toaster, yet it should still allow me to fiddle around "under the hood" if I want and get my hands dirty... or even shocked. I think that OSX and modern Linux distros are a positive sign that such a balance IS achievable. :P

    I mean, isn't the original point of computers to let us get stuff done, by doing the number-crunching for us? Some "hardcore" users like you who decry simplicity and ease-of-use have, I think, begun to view computers as an end, and not a means.

    The operating system, software, and hardware should be totally out of the way when I'm trying to draw a picture, write a paper, or play a game. It really should be as easy to use as a toaster for most tasks.

    What if our houses, roads, and office buildings were constructed with the same passion as the average geek feels towards computers?

    I don't know, man- the average archetect is pretty motivated. At least the ones I know of. The main problem is budgets- most people don't want to pay for more than boring "box" architecture when building a new strip mall or whatever. You can be the most passionate archetect in the world, but if your clients will only pay for boring concrete slabs 99% of the time, what can you do?

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
  34. Dear god by _KiTA_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work for tech support for a ISP. Oh my god.

    I thought WinXP and it's "Categorial" Control Panel was hard to explain and keep track of for users.

    This is a new form of hell.

    Does MS specifically *try* to make support's lives miserable? Dear god. There's something to be said about some stability. Between Win 95 to 2000, at least I had the capability to tell people "Oh, go into control panels, and double click the one that says "Networking"" when I needed to get someone's DNS settings fixed.

    XP it wasn't that simple -- I had to make sure the user had their control panel in "classic" view, and I'll be damned if Microsoft didn't "help" me by making the button to switch between the two a fake hyperlink. At the very least, they could have made that hyperlink underlined so an average (or below average) user could figure it out, but no, they won't even go that far.

    Longhorn looks like it's going to be even worse. Now I'm going to have to waste money buying Longhorn right when it comes out (or waste time and a CD-R downloading it) and waste time memorizing it so I can walk people through the brain dead Fisher Price system designed for 5 year olds. And I'd be willing to wager money that they'll make it "helpful" by hiding DNS, IP, et all settings under 50 pages of wizards and candy sheets.

    I already had to answer phones for 2 weeks for Microsoft for free because of MS Blaster, and will have to for another week or two because of SoBig.F.

    Now, come next year, I'm going to have to memorize an OS that looks like something from Clippy's wet dreams?

    I'm sick of cleaning up Microsoft's messes.

    On the flip side, it looks like they've stolen enough MacOS X and Linux GUI ideas to make it so slightly above average users won't need to bother me, so I guess it's not all that bad. Some of it is almost interesting, like having sound volume -- FOR EACH PROGRAM. Some of the extended stuff looks like it might be pretty useful, if a bit sugarcoated.

    So, in Summary:

    1. Tech support is hell.
    2. New GUI + Confused Users = bad news.
    3. Longhorn looks interesting, but I don't want to have to support it.
    4. 3 may change depending on future screenshots.

  35. Re:Aqua? Aero? by tlahoda · · Score: 5, Funny

    What ever happened to the snazzy 3D virtual reality GUIs we were promised?

    They're installed in the flying cars

  36. How much did the license cost by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 5, Funny

    from Playskool (tm) for the look and feel???

    Longhorn approved PDA

    Longhorn/RIAA approved MP3 player

    Longhorn control panel

    Longhorn/RIAA approved CD player

    And, last but not least, introducing the ALL NEW Longhorn approved WORM..

  37. Does Monopoly Sell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honestly, if MS released a brand new operating system that looked identicle to XP, but was just ultra secure and ultra stable, would it sell?

    MS Windows has always sold past a certain point in time, regardless of fucking quality. Because MS has a recognized illegal monopoly which hasn't been remedied.

    Jesus Christ.

    This will never get posted, because I'm just an AC. But what the hell.

    The problem with MS at this point has nothing to do with how shiny the GUI is or how stable the OS is. MS has sold its OS without consequence for some time. Stability, security, usability--none of it matters.

    We could argue until we die about whether or not Linux GUIs are comparable to those of Windows or MacOS, and then our children could continue the argument about whether or not Windows is as stable.

    The issue isn't that Windows isn't stable, or that it has the best GUI. The issue is that we will never fucking know given the status quo whether or not users really want the added GUI features, because there are no consequences for MS that would motivate them to build a better GUI.

    Honestly--really--does anyone here want more bloated GUI? Does anyone here know anybody who wants added bloat? Let's rephrase that for MS apologists--does anyone know anyone who wants the added GUI features?

    I don't know anybody. The Joe Sixpacks I do know get pissed because their system is so laggy, and are astonished whenever I manage to speed it up by getting rid of the crap.

    Of course, you'll come up with some anecdotal answer otherwise. And you might be right. But right now, all you'll be doing is accepting MS Longhorn post hoc as satisfactory, because you have no other realistic choices of OS. And all I might be doing is complaining about it.

    I get so frickin tired about these arguments on Slashdot and elsewhere about whether or not Linux has a satisfactory GUI, or Windows has satisfactory security and stability.

    The question isn't "if MS built a universally recognizably stable OS, would it sell?" Because of course it would sell. It sells right now. Because it has a monopoly.

    The real question is "if MS were forced to compete in a diverse OS market, what other OS features might we see? Would MS then sell?"

    When will we stop equating "satisfactory" with "optimal"?

    What other market is like the OS market? If the OS market were like cereals, you would walk into the grocery store and see only corn flakes. Your choice would be "do I want the new corn flakes or not?" We would be having arguments about whether or not the corn flakes are crispy enough. A group of people would be saying "people like corn flakes; they don't need or want other cereals that might have dried fruits or some other wierd thing in them."

    Sound silly?

    Of course it does. It's not about MS being good enough. MS will never be as good enough for me, because I know there would be something better if it actually was forced to legitimately compete.

    And you can't prove me wrong. If you want to, demand consequences for MS.

    I get so sick of these screenshots being released every couple years, when we have the same discussion in which we rationalize why we have little choice of OS.

  38. Re:Aqua? Aero? by NonSequor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because 3D virtual reality GUIs suck unless you live in a four dimensional universe (by that I mean a universe with a proper fourth spatial dimension).

    Being able to view data in three dimensions isn't useful when you must view it straight on in order to interact with it usefully. A 3D interface will not accomplish anything special unless you actually have to work with data that can only be displayed in three dimensions, which is relatively rare and where this is necessary, specialized interfaces have been developed.

    A lot of people think that 3D interfaces are the natural progression from 2D ones since three is one better than two, but few of these people actually stop to think about it.

    --
    My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
  39. Support by jeti · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Try to give telephone support to someone if you don't even know how the OS looks.
    It also is nice if people are able to sit at different machines and don't have to relearn or reconfigure everything.
    Customization is fine as long as it's not just a weak excuse for not setting up stuff properly in the first place. And sometimes it's better if beginners don't have to deal with it.

  40. Longhorn GUI = MSN GUI by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 4, Interesting
    To me the GUI looks more web like than current windows versions.

    That's more right than you know. To me, it looks like a super-mutated version of MSN.

    And I say this as someone who spent 6 months not too long ago doing freelance design work for that same company... trust me, those aqua-like buttons, all the gradient mayhem, drop shadows on absolutely everything... it's all MSN.

    Used to drive me nuts, too. MSN, a web company, chooses nothing short of the entire spectrum of colours in gradient form for all their branding, right down to a logo that incorporates that same spectrum. So much for 'web safe colours'.

    (It's like the iMac all over again. The idiots looked at it and thought 'i guess transparent computers are popular now', without pausing to realize how the iMac's transparency was just one facet of the design. You slap a semi-clear enclosure on your old product and it'll just look like the Princess Phone Radio Shack garbage that it really is.

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
  41. but... but... but... by kclittle · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where do I type "dir"?

    --
    Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
  42. Re:Aqua? Aero? by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You already use the third dimensions every time you place a window overlapping another window. All that's missing is perspective.

    Also remember that there are always the things that are built on top of a technology that are assumed to be impossible or sometimes can't even be imagined until the technology itself is widespread. Desktop publishing was not possible until the 2D GUI was established. Mac OS X's Expose depends on its abstracted window system and hardware-accelerated "renderer".