Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn Preview
itraor writes "PC World has previewed Longhorn, not the first one out I guess. Among the few noted features is that Windows now offers translucent UI, finally catching up with Apple. "
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Hasn't microsoft sort of always followed apple?
I love the "bell and whistle" logo they've applied to the story. Very appropriate, especially since the review discussess little besides the eye candy.
Okay, from what I see about this beta, Microsoft is using the eye candy just for that, to show everyone how aweseome Longhorn is because your titlebars are semi-transparent. OOO! I'm totally uprading because of that!
Looks like it will cause some nastyy readability problems. Apple uses eye candy in OS X for a reason! the windows suck down to the dock so you can see where they went. The active window has shadows to let you know its the active window. Users change with a cube flip because its easier on their brains. I'm afraid that this would do nothing but chew up processor resources with crap that I don't find useful. Expect a lot of eyecandy-disabling apps to come out very quickly.
And in spite of announced planned enhancements such as monitoring of outbound data, ... protection against malware, a new type of restricted user account, and a secure startup scheme to ensure that a PC hasn't been tampered with, Longhorn so far has the same minimal security toolbox as Windows XP with Service Pack 2.
Though security remains an unresolved issue, build 5048 brings Longhorn's graphical user interface into sharper focus.
Soooooo, little development with respect to security, but more colourful icons. Super.
I agree with the parent. There seems to be no real cohesion to the new theme. Everything just seems to be bundled on top of each other. If these were the first Longhorn screenshots out, that'd be fine.. but we've been seeing the same for a year now.
In the screenshots it appears there's no difference made between menus and toolbars anymore.. the menus just kinda blur into them. Icons are different sizes. Different sized toolbars just smudge into each other and look messy. There seems to be no thought put into it.
Microsoft never ceases to amaze me. The company has billions of dollars (and they don't get it by writing checks I know) but they supposedly have some of the "best minds" out there.. and yet their products and interfaces are so scrappy? I know being Microsoft isn't easy.. they've got to be compatible, they've got lots of products to integrate.. lots of hardware to support.. but heck, can't they at least get decent interface design? It's not like it's a billion dollar job. Even people working for nothing, like the xfce people, do a better job.
hasn't this been a back-and-forth thing. how long did it take apple to get real multithreading? how long did it take MS to get more than 13 character filenames?
please save us from the fanboyisms.
I'd like to be the first to say that I have always found Windows to be a fine product for all my home needs.
I'll I'm looking for from a home-OS is for it to be easily compatible with my usual web/mail and games software. Windows has never let me down on that score.
I'm sure there are plenty of MS horror stories, but personally I have yet to experience them.
Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
That is a good point. There is a reason that in the "paper office", stuff is not printed on translucent or transparent paper unless there is some specific reason. I've seen these menus, and they are much less readable. It is like the problem with "Aqua", with its unreadable very-low-contrast buttons. Is this a case of Microsoft copying the "look" without the "feel" with less-than-optimal results?
Where were you when the voynix came?
Personally, given my experiences with linux so far, if it were up to me I'd concentrate more on building a GUI where you can change the monitor resolution to the resolution you want when you want it on arbitrary systems, without having to ever edit a file named "XF86Config".
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
"Finally catching up with Apple in 3 to 5 more years."
Linux: Finally catching up to Windows... in 3 to 5 more years!!!!
(note: If you're about to mod that as troll, lighten up.)
"Derp de derp."
Of course you'll be disabling those buttons to reduce load on the CPU so that it can be used for proper apps.
What ads?
This message courtesy of: Adblock and RemoveIt Permanently.
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
It's really good that you're happy with Windows at home.
And many of the people who have Windows at home and are spam zombies are also fairly happy with Windows. Until it becomes too laggy.
The average Windows user would not care how many viruses/trojans/worms were on his computer as long as it seemed to be performing okay for what he used it for.
Meanwhile, there are bot nets out there with 10,000+ compromised Windows machines on them.
The issue isn't what you are happy with. The issue is whether you are being used as an attack vector by someone else. And the statistics show that those boxes are home Windows users (99%+).
It's been said before: Pretty soon it will be illegal to own a general purpose computer.
...But I digress. TREMBLE PUNY HUMANS!ONE DAY MY SPECIES WILL DESTROY YOU ALL!
What you need to keep in mind is that there is generally two types of product buisness:
1. Innovation and the construction of new product ideas and enhacements
2. Reconstructing and attempting to put old ideas to new uses or brining old ideas together to form a singular idea.
Microsoft is very good at the second, and is a very valid and nessessary buisness tactic. While they almost always take ideas from others (ideas that are tested to be enjoyed by other people), they are combining all those features into a singular OS. This would be similar to Microsoft including a "google search" like feature in Windows along with a UI flexability similar to Gnome/KDE. Granted, OSX and Gnome/KDE did it first, but microsoft worked on combining both ideas into a singular idea.
I'm just waiting for Microsoft to continue their process and eventually create one hell of a commandline with flexible/powerful commands beyond the current MS-DOS version, based off of GNU/Linux
There is one thing I can't understand: why is Windows so ugly ? Why are non-Apple computers so ugly (yes, Sony's and IBM's PCs are ugly too) ? Why are MP3 players so ugly ?
Is it really that high-tech firms are full of dorks without any taste ? Is the difference with Apple the fact that Steve Jobs decides, and the guy actually has good taste ?
I am not joking, this is really something that puzzles me.
--Go Debian!
Let's see,
minimal new features? check.
lots of hype about features that won't be included? check.
said hyped features to be included later? check.
main upgrade is fancy windowing? check.
requires more cpu/ram? check.
One big advantage Longhorn has is the addition of DRM. I say advantage because this basically gives MS rights to control what software is on your computer. The advantage is theirs, not yours. What does DRM bring for the customer?
I don't really see a reason to upgrade. Of course, most of the people that adopt new operating systems don't actually buy the new operating system, they buy a computer and get what's forced upon them. Eventually everyone will upgrade when MS DRM model decides anything older than Longhorn is an unregistered piece of software. Just wait, it's coming.
Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
It is unfortunate that most people base their conceptions of what Apple should do on what sounds right to them, not on reality or history.
proprietary hardware.... Apple is only begining to get their head out or their ass on that one
Actually, no.
Apple tried the open platforms thing in the 90s. Tried it quite honestly. (Ever hear of CHRP/PREP?) It was a business disaster. Apple's business model since at least the late 80s has been inextricably based on their hardware sales, and an alternate business model would be hard to find. Their volume isn't enough to support themselves on software the way Microsoft does, plus lacking monopoly power they can't just set arbitrary prices on their software and expect it to be paid. In an open platform environment, this business model doesn't work anymore.
This aside, there are no indications whatsoever that Apple is dropping "proprietary hardware" now. What they are doing is dropping the PowerPC chip and Open Firmware in favor of the Intel Pentium chip and BIOS. The latter two things are absolutely not more "proprietary" than the former two. Meanwhile the "proprietary" aspects of the Macintosh are fairly certain to perservere and Apple has been indicating OS X will continue to run only on Apple hardware. Apple hasn't said they're going to an open platform. Don't assume they will.
"I'm looking for a home-OS is for it to be easily compatible with my usual web/mail and games software" Over the years I've found Win 3.x-Win95,98,Me-Win2000-XP to require "upgrades" for all my usual web/mail and games software, which makes it less "easily" compatible. I would like a product that continues to provide support for my applications without requiring me to download and/or pay for upgrades. This precludes Apple, which has been even worse in the longetivity of support for its software. (How long before they drop support for PPC software on my powerbook? I'm worried!)
The only instances when I've found translucency to be useful are:
1. When I'm stuck on my powerbook with 1 monitor and I need to be able to see a webpage or source file when I'm coding and there isn't enough desktop realestate for all of the open windows.
2. When you want some kind of floating data. ie- uptime or load averages or whatever that are floating above everything or stuck on the desktop... like a screen tattoo (like that program stattoo by Panic
any other use (translucent menus, translucent window borders, translucent desktop rubberband select, etc) is just eyecandy. Which makes using the computer a little more fun... so long as it doesn't impede on your productivity... like when you try to run OSX on a 300mhz G3.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
Firstly, "Overdesigned" may describe "Aqua" on OS X, but clumsy? You also seem to miss the fact that M$ is brilliant at getting the most money from its products, and cohesiveness in the OS doesn't help them do this. In fact, it helps if their software is as scattered and obfuscated as it can be without totally alienating "partner" hardware developers. Extending and protecting their position in the marketplace is important, which is why we will eventually see WinFS. That's what their best minds are working at, and they're succeeding.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Still using a 14" CRT set to 800x600, so the one thing not to waste is screen real estate. Nicely positioning half-overlapping windows makes no sense here. Maximised windows, and a fast+easy way to switch between them, does. I happen to like a Windows-style taskbar for that purpose, but that's just personal preference.
Now when I have a window maximised, I can see some uses for translucent UI elements: how about a window that stretches until the -real- bottom of the screen, and a half-transparent taskbar on top of that? Or make the 'always-present' scrollbar on the right side of a window translucent, and use the full screen width for content display? Or use a translucent window for an always-on-top app that you may run from time to time. So basically, a way of maximising the amount of info displayed on a given screen area.
But a more interesting question: are the added GUI complexity (+bugs) and system requirements a good trade-off considering that small gain in usability? My guess:
90% of users: no
another 9% of users: probably not, maybe later
remaining 1% of users: yes, perhaps
Oh wait, Longhorn does this by default and builds the whole GUI around the concept? (note questionmark, I haven't tried/seen any Longhorn stuff myself). Great! Makes as much sense to me as that 'integrate browser with desktop'-debacle.
And then there's the pounding on security issues lately. Priority #1 now? When I see MS pouring all that coding effort primarily into eye candy, I expect Longhorn to have a hard time gaining acceptance once it's released.I hope that you've made a donation towards their running costs if you've blocked their ads. People running ad-blockers (pop-up blockers are fine) are going to turn the internet into the equivalent of PBS television. Umm. Except worse.
PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
wtf... alpha blending has been around natively in windows since W2K. It wasn't used but it was there and many mods allowed context menu to set windows transparency.
I know the article and summary make it sound like this is the difference, but it's not. The key difference in this regard is that all windows are composited the same way, as if they had transparency, whether they do or not. (i.e., the compositing model is like what Mac OS X has always had.) This basically means a faster UI when using all kinds of crazy effects, and the enabling of new effects. Something like Apple's Expose is virtually impossible to do with out a graphics system like Quartz or Avalons.
In other words, they're catching up with Apple in capability, but it's yet to be seen if what they do with it will be anywhere near as good.
(IIRC, e17 uses the same kind of model; it's kind of like Mac OS X pre-10.2/Quartz Extreme.)
This is an oversimplification, but at least not as bad as the one in the article.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Focus on the fluff. Ignore the substance.
Microsoft has yet to announce minimum Longhorn system requirements, but for PC buyers seeking insurance that a new system will run Longhorn, the company advises getting 512MB of RAM and a "modern" CPU--more than Windows XP needs.
Yet another hardware upgrade required. XP was supposed to run on a PII 300MHz with 128MB RAM. By extrapolation, you'll really need 1GB or 2GB of memory and a P4 3.2GHz just to run it comfortably.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Here's a few of the things that I would want in the next version of windows:
--don't require users to run as admin. Go after sw companies that put out software such as games that require users to run as root.
--allow users to easily "su to root" for installs, reconfig, etc. Don't require a logoff/logon.
--use the 3d for something useful, like letting users run at 1280x1024 but have everything be sized as if it were 800x600. Try giving a person with bad eyesight an lcd and telling them they should run in 1280x1024. It has to be easy to change.
--never let the user lose control. I hate it when the interface hangs up and you can't do anything. This happens when printing, programs screw up, accessing some media, etc. Fix that.
--restore the uninstall information when doing a system restore. I might be wrong on this, as I've only used it on one system, but it seemed to restore uninstalled programs, but they couldn't be uninstalled again. BTW system restore is the main reason I bought xp for home. Improve that.
--a decent command shell. Hey, just port bash over, it'll save both of us some time.
--easy to use equivalent to ln -s
--easy way to schedule when the computer logs someone off automatically, and is locked from use for certain times of the day. This is for kicking the kids off the computer automatically, and preventing them from getting on in the middle of the night.
--a reasonable price.
Here's what M$ needs: A real business OS, and a real consumer OS. Media Center doesn't work at these prices, and XP Home/Prof. seem to have rubbed off on each other too much. Home should be really easy and colorful compared to Pro. or server. Like comparing Linux with Gnome to Solaris. Of course, we'll always be able to make both versions look like Windows 2000/95, etc. But the Business should be somber with few personalization options, and the Home should look like Linux's 1,000,000,001 customization features, none of them documented or accessible by the regular user account. For example, you should be able to su in Windows, shut down explorer, antivirus, internet access, etc. to squeeze more performace out of PC games. You should be able to access and administrator panel and activate a Mac OS X type search, or widgets, or change the windows bars to tabs, etc. It's time that the oligarchy of Dell, HP, Gateway/Emachines lightens up. They'll have to pay more for support, but Windows desperately needs some excitement for the consumer, outside of piracy, blogging and IM. None of those are exclusive to Windows, after all. They need to let M$ loosen up on the consumer side.
Thing is, now he's ecstatic about Avalon (words like "cool" and "sexy" flow freely) for the exact reason he snubbed OSX. Go figure. I guess whatever "camp" you happen to be in also influences your sense of the aesthetic.
Sigs cause cancer.
I really WANT to use linux as a desktop OS. I've wanted it since Redhat 5.2 or so. Every now and then I give it another go. So much of it just seem silly to me though... like installing an app.
/Programs get linked in /System (in order words, to make the files from the programs available for the system).
/Programs, and it attempts to prepare the sources for compilation.
/Programs/SuperFoo/Settings, /Programs/SuperFoo/1.0, /Programs/SuperFoo/1.0/bin and so on.
There is a thread here on Slashdot right now about the future of Linux. It links to Gobolinux. Here is what it says. Yea this is user-friendly.
----------------
Installing programs from source
If you are used to compiling programs in Linux, you are aware that it is mostly a three-part process: prepare the sources (configure), compile them (make), and install the files generated by the compilation (make install). The process is basically the same in GoboLinux. However, it requires additional setup in the first step, in order to prepare the sources to compile targeting the GoboLinux directories, and additional actions in the third step, so that files installed in
GoboLinux fetures a series of scripts that automate this process. They are:
* PrepareProgram
* SymlinkProgram
* CompileProgram
PrepareProgram and SymlinkProgram are wrappers to the first and third step of compilation as explained above (the second step being simply running 'make'). CompileProgram is a higher-level wrapper script, that wraps the process as a whole: well-behaved autoconf-based programs can be compiled with a single CompileProgram command.
Setting up the sources: PrepareProgram
The PrepareProgram script does two things. It creates a directory hierarchy for the program under
The syntax for the PrepareProgram is:
PrepareProgram [ -- ]
Passing a program name and version number is mandatory. These names are the ones used in the directories under programs. For example,
PrepareProgram SuperFoo 1.0
creates the directories
The second task performed by PrepareProgram is to prepare the sources. Since there isn't a standardized format for distribution of source-code tarballs in the free software world, there is no way to implement completely automated preparation. Fortunately, the popularization of the GNU AutoTools brings us closer to such a standard.
PrepareProgram, in this second step, will detect availability of preparation tools and perform one of the following:
1. If the program includes a 'configure' script generated by GNU autoconf, PrepareProgram will run it, passing the necessary options (mainly --prefix, --sysconfdir) as well as any additional options requested by the user in the command line (as ).
2. Some authors develop their own 'configure' scripts, but due to the popularity of GNU autoconf, design a command line interface similar to that used by this program. PrepareProgram tries to detect if a non-autoconf 'configure' script accepts at least the --prefix option, and use it.
3. If unfortunately the program does not feature a standard preparation script such as 'configure', the PrepareProgram will, as a last resort, scan for hardcoded paths in the Makefiles and attempt to modify them. Given that this automated process can be highly error-prone, PrepareProgram avoids being "automagical" and asks for the user's assistance: it asks the user for permission before attempting modifications, it saves backup copies of all Makefiles, and displays a summary of changes to the user. (Note: If the user is sure the modifications will be correct, all interaction can be suppressed passing the --batch option to PrepareProgram.)
In short, PrepareProgram can be considered a wrapper to 'configure'. Instead of running, for example,
~/superfoo-1.0] configure --with-shared=yes
you'll run
~/
I am Jack's HTTP Server
Where in UNIX can an ordinary user install drivers into the kernel?
Personally, I think Microsoft is sand bagging with this release and with Beta 1. The UI layer is widely known as not being the final version. The next generation media player and IE are not included. These are basically technical releases for driver writers and so developers can test the underpinnings. No one would take more joy than for Longhorn to be widely considered a bad product than I. Microsoft and their unethical and shortsighted ways needs to go. But I don't think it's going to happen. I think Windows will finally move from "good enough" to "excellent." The impact to Linux will be small, but it will be there. But Linux will catch-up. Apple will feel the pain too. How much is a mystery. If Apple keeps innovating, no problem. But an excellent release of Windows could do in OS X. (Full disclosure: I am an Apple person, so the last sentence is not flame-bait, but rather raw personally fear.) Anyway, Microsoft is going to make history with Longhorn. Mark my words.
I've recently been doing some things with some older computers, ones with Windows 98 on them... and at one of the worksites I work at a number of the PCs have NT on them.
There is a LOT of difference in functionality between them and an XP box (or, for the most part a 2000 box). Not just the look and feel, but usability, ease of just plugging in devices and having them work, photo browsing in the interface, ease of networking etc. etc.
There are differences, big ones as they move up the OS tree, stop being so flippant.
Offloading is nothing new. GDI has been hardware accelerated for many years (remember the whole "Windows accelerator" phenomenon of the early 1990s?).
What *is* somewhat novel is accelerating normal "2D" APIs with traditionally "3D" hardware; Quartz Extreme does this right now (using OpenGL) and Longhorn will do this (using what will essentially be DirectX 10).