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.
...in 3 to 5 more years.
Zing!
Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
man: no entry for woman in the manual.
"Qua!?"
"PC World has previewed Longhorn, not the first one out i guess. Amoung the few noted features is that Windows now offers transluscent UI, finally catching up with Apple. "
And who said Slashdot doesn't have quality control ?
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Hmmm...more & more like Copeland evey day...
The newest versions of the next Windows add graphics sizzle and more search features but lack visible productivity enhancements.
Scott Spanbauer From the August 2005 issue of PC World magazine Posted Wednesday, June 22, 2005
The most recent build of Longhorn--Microsoft's next Windows--has some impressive visual touches, including the kinds of translucent objects found now in Apple's OS X, and more powerful ways of finding files. But it doesn't yet exhibit any breakthroughs in productivity, or promised features such as security improvements and smarter connections to handheld devices.
We tested the 64-bit version of the latest code released to developers (Longhorn build 5048) and have also viewed demonstrations of a subsequent build. The first beta version of the operating system is due for release this summer.
Over the last several years, Microsoft has touted Longhorn's trio of significant innovations: a graphics engine dubbed Avalon; a technology called Indigo that enables programs on different computers or devices to communicate; and an indexed, searchable data storage layer called WinFS. But when faced with a self-imposed release deadline of late 2006, Microsoft decided last year to pull WinFS out of Longhorn, promising to release that component as an add-on at a later date.
So what of the two remaining Longhorn design pillars? A new desktop theme called Aero is about the only sign of Avalon graphics in our pre-beta. Turning mundane buttons, window frames, title bars, and icons into animated, 3D-rendered, and sometimes transparent objects, Aero brings the Windows interface to life. Indigo, which supports enhanced Web services, won't be visible to end users.
But even though WinFS is now out of the mix, Microsoft has taken advantage of file attributes in the NTFS file system already available in Windows XP to make Explorer better at ferreting out documents according to author, camera model (for photographs), or genre or album title (for music files). The operating system lets you create virtual lists based on these attributes so that, for example, you can see every photo on your system or all Microsoft Word files, regardless of where they are stored and without having to explicitly search for them.
Longhorn will also do a better job of connecting to smart phones (Microsoft wouldn't indicate whether the phones would have to run the company's Windows Mobile operating system), cameras, and audio players, improving their integration into Explorer and making file transfers and synchronization more consistent across device types. Still notably absent from the Longhorn builds we've looked at are new versions of the Internet Explorer browser (even though Microsoft has said it is close to releasing a beta of IE 7) or any other bundled utilities. Gone, for the time being anyway, is the desktop sidebar that lurked in previous preliminary versions of Longhorn.
And in spite of announced planned enhancements such as monitoring of outbound data (Windows XP's firewall watches inbound traffic only), 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.
Catch-Up Eye Candy
The new Avalon graphics engine includes a programming interface that permits Microsoft and third-party software makers alike to write applications that put the latest and greatest graphics cards to work rotating, texturing, and fading windows, as well as making menus, title bars, and other elements translucent--finally enabling Windows to catch up to Apple's OS X, several years after the fact.
We managed to activate a subset of these features in our copy of Longhorn build 5048, and they're certainly welcome refinements (see top screen). Nevertheles
Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
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.
That interface is more cluttered and garish than go.com, or some other failed late-90s "web portal". I'm used to trying to help users who wind up with some kind of mental block against using the start menu because every time they click on the start menu they're so overwhelmed with confusing options and information they don't understand that it's more than they can hendle. I guess I should preemptively get used to helping users who wind up with a similar mental block against using the windows file browser.
I thought, when I first saw that Mac OS X release, that no one would ever make a clumsier, more overdesigned OS theme. Microsoft seems to be doing their absolute best to prove me wrong with every single release, reaching new heights of gangly ugliness with first "luna", then "avalon"...
Is XAML going to be available in the Longhorn beta?
XML UI Browser/Platform
For a second, I read "Longhorn Preview Infected in 12 Minutes".
Badass Resumes
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.
Loose spelling, poor grammar, and lots of trolling. Oh, itraor, if only you had linked to your own in-depth analysis on your blog, you would have had the Slashdot Superfecta.
Better luck next time.
This comment was formatted for readability, but I forgot the line break tags
"Finally catching up with Apple" is a sentence fragment. Please consider revising.
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.
Surely "prettier" is a subjective term. I took one look at the screen shots and blurted out "...what the fuck!"
I guess I just have vastly different aesthetic tastes than the Windows UI designers. Sucks to be me.
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
No, Windows doesn't support per pixel alpha levels. Just per window alpha. And when you do set per window alpha, weird things happen if you drag a non-transparent window over a transparent one (sometimes the image of the non-transparent one will be "embedded" in the transparent one).
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
The exact same build we've been able to read about on Slashdot a few months back.
Beats me why they suddenly reviewed it super late out of the blue, because it's not really like Slashdot is posting a really old news article either here.
And here I was thinking they were having an early beta 1 review, whose release is due this month.
Reviewing alpha quality software should tell a lot of IT people here about how useful a review like this is. Beta 1 and 2 should be far more interesting in seeing where Longhorn is heading.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
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.
o x-composite is still slow like hell...
o e17 will us software blending...
*sigh*
\u262D = \u5350
Good to see that Apple seems to finally be gaining some marketshare, and that Microsoft is resting on its laurels...
Microsoft, as part of its goal of cutting down Slashdot dupes, has decided to ship Longhorn pre-infected. Don't worry about it.
Where were you when the voynix came?
... besides speedier search and better eye candies? If I still continue to file my documents according to my folders and sub-folders and sub-sub-folders, I only search once in a blue moon. What does XP SP2 not have that I needed badly in Longhorn?
And does the eye candies slow the machine down? Or maybe not since Intel and AMD would have spanking new processors by release time (end 2006 or 2007?) and maybe 1GB RAM as minimum for satisfactory performance.
Honestly, now with 512 RAM on a brand new notebook (Pentium M) just bought a month ago running XP SP2, I don't get the snappy feel of the menus. Don't tell me I need to fine-tune it for "max performance" and go back to classic win9x menus.
I wonder if OS 10.5 will arrive before Longhorn? Steve Jobs said that the company plans to release Leopard in late 2006 or early 2007.
Perhaps 2007 will see a 3-"L" competition on x86 -- Longhorn, Leopard, & Linux.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
If they're truly copying Apple, it will be offloaded to the GPU. Chances are though it's a cheap microsoft replica, and you are correct it will gobble up CPU, but hey, isn't that exactly what new versions of Windows are for?
*ducks*
What ads?
This message courtesy of: Adblock and RemoveIt Permanently.
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
I would like to see some version of the virtual folders like those in Evolution in the GNOME and/or KDE desktops. It looks like that may be one handy feature coming up in Longhorn. If we start work now maybe we can beat the Longhorn release date :).
I realize that if I want all my pictures in one folder I could just put them in one folder instead of scattering them all over the machine, but for me it would be nice to have the virtual folders show files from ALL of my machines at once.
So congratulations Microsoft, I have found a feature that I would like. if I still used Windows. I wouldn't upgrade to get it mind you, but I would at least know there was something I couldn't do on XP that I could on Longhorn.
Insert pithy comment here.
You know, if this happened, they might actaully turn a profit! See this alternate-reality business page to find out what this would be like. Imagine if Apple made a device called an "ipod" and made money on it. Pretty far fetched, huh? As for me, I'm sticking to 8-tracks. This "ipod" idea is pure scifi.
'Microsoft likes to make profits. Apple only recently started following that business model.'
Yes, Apple has never turned a profit. This is why they are hardly hanging in there, and have been pretty much wiped out in the computer arena by Exidy, Commodore, and Atari.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Ok so I read the review, and we can obviously expect a lot of bells and whistles as well as a fair amount of eye candy. It may or may not be good, but it reminds me of cellular phones (mobile phones). All I want is a stable phone that I can use to make calls. But with all the crap they've put into phones recently, that's actually hard to find. And I feel the same way about windows. All I want is a stable OS that I can use to run my applications in.
(And before someone jumps the gun - I use *nix at home, but I'm forced to use Windows at work)
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%+).
I'm sure you've made a valid point. However, I can't quite read it. I've set my browser window to 100% translucent, and I can't for the love of anything actually see it. So I'm typing at keys randomly in the hope that I undo what I did....
NeoThermic
Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
Does this mean we will get a translucent "Screen of Death" superimposed over the crashed OS screen, instead of the solid-blue one? Just one step toward the "Invisible Screen of Death".
Where were you when the voynix came?
More importantly, it makes things less readable.
http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/XEyeCandy?highlight=(Di stroSpec)
will Longhorn support transparent screens?
o ol/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/transparentscreens/p
--
Free Credit Report Info
What does your Credit Report look like?
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?
Article Summary:
- Windows is catch up to Apple's OS X.
- All the features that would sell an OS upgrade have been pulled to meet the release date.
- Same as XP with a kewler user interface.
- Only advantage over Apple's OS X is the hardware support.
My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
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 use XP at work, but in classic UI mode because it's the only way to not want to gouge my eyes out. Seeing the Longhorn screenshots reminds me of something going on in the nicer neighborhood a few blocks from my house.
There's a really working class guy who made good running a car repair shop. They've got a great reputation and do solid work. So he's moved into an upscale neighborhood, bought an older house that needed some work, and he's fixed it up. But he didn't just relandscape and update the paint job, he is seriously pimping it out. It's all very nicely done and high quality, but it's done with no eye for aesthetics. If a three tier $4500 marble fountain with an 8 foot radius is good, then four of them in a front yard that's 50 feet wide is even better!
From what I hear the inside is pretty much the same concept.
That's what these screenshots make me think of.
this is getting old and so are you
blog
"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...
Well X.org bought you real (as opposed to simulated) translucent windows and soft drop shadows as of 6.8. Getting it to run at a decent speed requires a decent graphics card and preferably an NVidia one as their drivers provide Render and Composite acceleration.
Not that I think that translucency in all windows is a good move - it's just visual clutter. Like fading in and fading out menus, it looks cool but it gets in the way. I disabled that feature in Windows 2000, it is disabled on my Windows XP laptop. Drop shadows on the other hand actually improve the visual cues allowing you to pick important windows and menus out of the mix on the screen and are worth the processor cost and so I have drop shadows on my Ubuntu AMD64 box where I have the GPU required to make it fast. On my other linux boxes (Mandriva desktop and FC3 laptop) I don't bother.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
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.
Windows 2000 had transparency effects.
There are tons of third-party programs that take advantage of it (WinAMP, Trillian...), it's just that with Longhorn, MS will use it themselves.
If you want eye candy on windows, use stardock's stuff. (No, I don't work for them.) They have had their stuff out for several years.
Windowblinds allows you to skin your apps. FX allows you to do transparency and 3-D effects for min/max. And you can use their icon program to change all the icons.
It is a lot of fun, although I still use windows classic most of the time.
Every few years, MS announces a revolutionary new OS. A complete rewrite. Everything you ever wanted in an OS- an more. Breakthroughs. Security. Ease of use. Your PC will be more helpful than a correctly working NS5 in _I, Robot_. It will bear your children. Etc.
And every time, before shipping, features slowly fall away, the release date slips, and eventually we get... a new GUI to learn and a new set of bugs and security holes. The GUI is usually about all they *can* talk about safely.
But the article discusses other things as well. Such as the new way a user can install drivers without being Administrator and opening up a zillion security holes. Now that's advanced. After all, it's only been possible in *nix for a couple of decades.
Ah yes, the infamously bad UpdateLayeredWindow API documentation.
The idea is that you provide DC in hdcSrc, which contains the bitmap information of the window. You'd want to premultiply the alpha channel with the RGB channels. Windows will then take that and composite the bitmap with the underlying windows.
Just in case you didn't see my other post:
http://slaupress.com/images/ppa.jpg
The Sonique-Mantis demo and Winamp3 both demonstrate realtime per pixel alpha layer manipulation in real time. They're pretty cool.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Build 5048 was 'released' at WinHEC so that the hardware manufacturers could begin writing drivers under LH's updated driver architecture. This build was not intended to showcase any particular feature of Longhorn, in fact many were removed from the build (including the new 3d interface). The purpose was to provide a shell platform where they could verify their drivers, that is all.
I wouldn't give creedence to any LH review until the upcoming Beta in late August.
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.Basically Microsoft's strategy is to observe the industry, see what new innovations are going to be profitable, then duplicate them, market the hell out of them, and tie them into as many other MS products as they can.
Seems to work pretty well...
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!
Remember HP Dashboard on Win3.xx? It was a CDE-ish panel for Win and OS/2. They included alot of the HP NewWave object goodies, and WORKING desktop pagers. Borland/Starfish bought this, and now 'tis gone.
I have been trying out "True Launch Bar", which threatens to turn XP's Explorer into Kicker. The nag banner is enough for me to reject it, though.
Also, how about a TASKBAR that can be repositioned INDEPENDANT of the menu/tray? I want this in a band across the top, with Start/systray/clock at the bottom. Longhorn builds are still nowhere in this dept.
Longhorn is now NVidiahorn. All it really offers is candy, with little configuration option.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
...because there is a good chance that the upcoming beta releases will look completely different. And the final release will then look completely different than the betas.
For comparison, here are some links that illustrate the evolution of the Windows XP UI:
Whistler preview
Another Whistler preview
Yet another Whistler preview
Whistler beta 1
Beta 1, another build
XP Beta 2
XP RC1
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.
Not exactly, the only feature that Apple made to run on GPU is Expose. Other rely on CPU and software implementation.
If you don't believe then just make a simple test. And please, before bashing remember that I only dispute the GPU usage (meaning that Apple does not use GPU for visual effects), and not how many users does that in reality (except me and some people who wanted to know if 3D is effective for FX tricks).
Test
Start terminal and then top.
Set dock to maximize on mouse over and start dragging your mouse over the dock. Your system is 100% taken over with window manager. Now to the real test. Open Photoshop with laaaarge picture. Start some filter. Time it. Now do it again, but this time drag mouse over dock. Filter can now take even 8x more time.
Same goes for menus, except that shadows are not so complex as dock. but diff was 5x.
All effects but expose and buffer copy when moving windows are software not hardware
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
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 keep on wondering why the OS I was envisioning 10 years ago isnt here now. You know, integrated voice recognition, some basic but workable AI to assist in common repetative tasks, a little high quality speach synthesis as an alternate CHI...instead we have more eye-candy and security updates!! That seems to be all Ive seen from MS since...ooooh 1998....
I know that some of this stuff IS rocket-science (well computer science) and no-one was going to get there over-night but 10 years ago I certainly didnt think that I would have learned to have touch-type before decent voice recognition was integrated into the OS...
It really feels as if the true innovation in IT has stalled...however its much more likely that it has just been strangled to death by patents.
Translucent windows ARE more functional than opaque, or "faked" versions like Gnome and KDE.
One example that I use is tailing a file on a lower window while working on a top one.
Shameless plug for my band's website.
They don't need to run IE in "low rights" mode, they need to change the design of the HTML control and IE so they display pages in "no rights" mode all the time, unless the application they're embedded in explicitly extends the capabilities. That is, the HTML control by itself should have no mechanism for running ActiveX or VBscript or any "local access" features in JScript. All these would need to be added by the app (such as Windows Update), and there would be NO TIME that the IE shell would add these capabilities, no matter what "zone" it's in.
Give us a strong sandbox in the browser, and you won't need to run the browser in a weak one.
> 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 work for a large company, and was fortunate enough to work on a high risk project, one whose failure would have meant financial ruin for the company. Knowing this, they spent lots of money (both in salary and in opportunity costs) to get their "best minds" on the project. This was nearly a disaster for several reasons that I observed:
(1) "Best minds" folks want to be architects, not brick layers; big projects require lots of brick layers. Someone has to write the code and test it. Not everyone can draw diagrams and make UML diagrams if you want to have an actual product.
(2) "Best minds" folks tend towards a grand vision and tend to use phrases like "reusable framework", "integrated system", and "from the ground up"; none of these phrases are useful to turning out a product that works, although they can be excellent at chewing up meetings and budgets.
(3) "Best minds" folks want to build a Maserati GranSport or Panoz Esperante, even when asked to build a Chevy Cavalier, and many times they fail because they continue to try and build their GranSport even after the Chevy parts are delivered.
I've never worked at Microsoft, but if I had to guess, I'd say that they likely suffer from the same problems that we did. Much to my great relief, the "best minds" I worked with decided to commit themselves to the product, check their egos at the door, and get work done, even if that meant getting out of the architect's office and being a brick layer. Evidence of this abounds in that Microsoft wows the world with plans/concepts like WinFS; they have incredible trouble delivering on those concepts. I imagine part of that is that they have a few too many "best minds" who know they are and don't want to do any of the hard work.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, its too dark to read.
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
Are they hiring artists or people who barely use PC's to design GUI? These guys clearly don't have systems with 100+ files and folders, because if they had, they wouldn't use those bloody big icons for it. Where's the common sense?
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.
Gnome, Windows, and OS X are fairly similar in their core graphics capabilities: antialiased drawing, translucency, and scalable fonts. So, there is little difference between them in that regard. Furthermore, none of them invented those features--they have been around longer than any of them.
If there is a difference, it's that Gnome and Avalon offer GUI declarations based on XML and that those are widely used. Apple's object serialization approach is cumbersome and outdated in comparison.
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).