Vista Shell Team now Blogging

davevr writes "Have you ever wanted to ask the people behind the Vista UI exactly what they were thinking when they did things like Flip 3D or the windows that turn black when maximized? Want a last chance to complain directly to the source about your favorite Vista UI glitch before it is foisted on you and the rest of the world? Just wondering what sort of people work on Windows all day? Well, look no further. The Windows Shell team now has a blog site for your reading pleasure. Head over to Shell Revealed and check it out. "

Comments

Just forget it

[otacon]

My complaint to scrap the eye candy would be ignored of course, just like myspace ignoring my reccomendation to stop letting people make profiles that look like AOL hometown pages from 1997.

Re:Just forget it

[scumbaguk]

You know you can turn it off right? Just like you could use classic interface in XP.

Re:Just forget it

[voice_of_all_reason]

That's not the point. Someone, somewhere coded this crap up and thought people would like it. Which means they are suffering from a staggering disconnect with reality. Sure, we could ignore it. But it's like hearing "if it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college." Once you hear about this train wreck, it's stuck in your brain!

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

They should just include BASH in Vista and call it a day.

Re:Just forget it

[xiao_haozi]

"A desktop OS should be valued for how good the compiler is, and for how many configurations you can make. Not for the look, the experience and the applications." Even though I pretty much agree that 'I personally' prefer a desktop OS that is about configurations and adaptibility, I have always come to the assumption that quite a number or users look for "experience and the applications" in determining their opinion of the OS they are using on their desktop. Maybe I am incorrect in assuming that, but my experience has tended to be that most users are concerned with the applications side of things for an OS. Isn't that one of the top complaints when people try to convert their peers to OSS alternatives (especially the infamous OS alternatives)..."But I can't use my 'XYZ' applications, or open 'ABC' file formats". This is personally why I like an OS like Ubuntu for my main desktop machine as it has given me personally the best of usability, configuration, power, and looks right of the install DVD. But that is just my personal opinion of my 'desktop' desires.

Re:Just forget it

[Enderandrew]

Actually most comments I've seen have been positive, even from Microsoft haters. I think the new eye-candy looks pretty nice, even it is unnecessary.

Re:Just forget it

[Psykosys]

Someone, somewhere coded this crap up and thought people would like it. Which means they are suffering from a staggering disconnect with reality.

Which is why everyone who uses OS X turns off the visual effects...

Re:Just forget it

[plague3106]

That's not the point. Someone, somewhere coded this crap up and thought people would like it. Which means they are suffering from a staggering disconnect with reality.

Huh? What? Are you actually claiming to speak for everyone on the planet? Pretty arrogant if you ask me. I remember the same thing said about the WinXP theme. It was different, but I actually like it over the old Win9x win2k style buttons.

Re:Just forget it

[Ucklak]

The Genie effect being the first thing I turn off.

Re:Just forget it

[plague3106]

A desktop OS should be valued for how good the compiler is, and for how many configurations you can make. Not for the look, the experience and the applications.

Huh? A DESKTOP OS? A desktop OS is for normal users. Such users don't give one flying fuck if there even is a compiler shipped on their OS. How it looks and feels is very important, as are the applications. That's why MacOS allows you to dual boot to Windows now.. so that Mac users can actually have some applications to use.

I know your post was a troll, but its quite possibly also one of the dumbest posts anyone has ever made in the history of the internet...

Re:Just forget it

[cp.tar]

try to make Vista look like some bad version of X Windows.

Don't they say: "The only thing worse than X windows is Windows without the X"?

Re:Just forget it

[cyranthus]

yeah, but some people do like it... so dont assume to know everything for every person who uses microsoft.

Re:Just forget it

[Andrzej Sawicki]

Someone, somewhere coded this crap up and thought people would like it.

And many do, actually.

Re:Just forget it

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

Interestingly enough with the upcoming Longhorn server and future versions this will become more of an option. With Longhorn server there is an install option being refered to as "Server Core" where it just installs the most basic stuff required for a specific set of options (DHCP, DNS, file server, or domain controller roles). This type of install won't even include a GUI.

This seems to point to MS finally taking modularity seriously at least.

Re:Just forget it

[Cid Highwind]

Ususally they say "It's not X Windows, dammit, read the effing FAQ!! It's 'X' or 'The X Windowing System', but never 'X Windows'!" They're pedantic like that...

Re:Just forget it

[Overly Critical Guy]

Which leads to the question of why you would want Vista in the first place if you're not going to be using its ugly "Glass" theme. Just run XP in a non-admin account.

Re:Just forget it

[cp.tar]

Oh, I do hope I didn't hurt their tiny little feelings...

Re:Just forget it

[dan828]

Not for the look, the experience and the applications.

What? That's pretty much the purpose of a GUI. Why use Gnome, KDE, et al., if not for that? Stick with the shell and be done with it.

Re:Just forget it

[misleb]

"A desktop OS should be valued for how good the compiler is, and for how many configurations you can make. Not for the look, the experience and the applications."

I used to feel this way until I started using OS X full time. Sure, I still like to tinker with Linux and compile stuff from source, but there is nothing like downloading a binary and simply dropping it in /Applications to "install" it. Heck, you don't even have to put it in /Applications if you don't want. It'll run from anywhere. Want to test a beta of Firefox? Just rename the old version and drop in the new .app bundle (and backup your profile, of course). Done testing? Delete Firefox.app. There's no (or very little of) complex web of dependencies and hooks like in Linux or even Windows. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the thought that every package on my Linux system (Debian) is perfectly matched (and tested) with every other package, but there is something also very elegant from the user's perspective about drag 'n drop install. That is what I call an Experience. It isn't even about the specific apps.

-matthew

Re:Just forget it

[jo42]

Lesson to be learned here:

Never underestimate people's attraction to shiny bling.

Shallow as it may be (the bling)...

Re:Just forget it

[beckerist]

Keep in mind: 95% of computer users are not knowledgeable in the ways us /.ers are. We (5%) care about security, functionality, efficiency and compatibility. The remaining 95% cares about pretty colors, bells, whistles, solitaire and anything else that's "purty."

Re:Just forget it

[TheRaven64]

All (or, at least, most) of the effects in OS X have well thought-out UI reasoning behind them. The genie effect shows you where a window goes when you minimise it. The shadows give strong visual hints about which window is active.

From what I've seen of Vista, the Aero eye-candy is just that; shiny 'because we can' effects that don't have much actual use.

Re:Just forget it

[xiao_haozi]

Yes...OS X is pleasantly simple like this most times. And I do love my PB with tiger. However, with half a dozen desktops and a few servers, and still growing, I can't afford to run this on all of them and like to be able to run my OS of choice on any hardware, including that which I have thrown together (which makes up all my machines excluding my PB). This is why I tend not to really clump OS X in with the others. With some shell scripting and maybe a little tweaking I have things close enough to OS X ease from an OS that is free and I can mimic the image on pretty much any of my other machines. Yet, money and hardware dependency aside, I do personally feel that OS X is pretty hard to beat for those who love eye candy with there power usage.

Re:Just forget it

[dave562]

I remember the same thing said about the WinXP theme. It was different, but I actually like it over the old Win9x win2k style buttons.

I agree with you. When WinXP first came out and they moved everything from the desktop and onto the Start button I was upset and I switched all the computers that I worked with to "Classic" view. These days I leave it in the default config and I like the Start button. Between the Windows+(E, R, etc) hotkeys and the Start button, everything is right where I need it. My most common used programs showed up under Start so I don't have to clutter the desktop with the icons. I can get right at My Computer, Email, Internet, Printers, settings... the whole enchilada.

So ya, sometimes I grumble and wonder what the hell the guys were thinking, but eventually it turns out that most of the improvements really do make things better. However on the other hand, I'll never get over Word trying to anticipate what I want to do.

Re:Just forget it

[laxcat]

Its impossible to speak about something like this in any sort of definitive, because in essence, it all comes down to opinion. But there are alot of definatives that surround the issue of the XP theme.

One thing that more of us might agree on is that it's definately an interface designed to appeal to a wider audience. Microsoft likes its bright colors because those appeal to the older generation who are still of the mindset: "more colors = better." There are two problems with this. First, here in a slashdot context, we are not the general population. Most of us found this new "candy" style pretty condesending. Second, the "more colors style" goes starkly agains conventional wisdom of almost a full cenury of futurism and the expected styles that are contianed therein. People generally don't see bright colors as a sign of "futuristic high tech," a trait that our society would see as a positive when they're dropping money in a computer store.

Another big problem with the XP theme is that it added very little, if anything at all, to the actual unsability of the the user interface. It was just an ugly coat of paint, like that one fucia house two blocks over. (You know the one.) All functionality was still in the same place, at best just rearanged within the same window.

Definatives aside, if we do come back to nothing more than opinion, we can only turn to experts in that particular field to find some sort of authority. This again turns out of favor of the older interface over the XP one. In my 6 years working in various design houses, I've yet to see a designer, web or otherwise, that prefered the "candy" interface over the clean greys of the old Win2K style. Outside of my personal experience, we can turn to the design comunity as a whole. While I can't ask for their opinion personally, their works reinforce my point. Clean lines and muted colors abound, curved edges are easily found but large swatches of garish primary colors are not.

Now none of this is about Vista, (which from the couple of screenshots I've seen apears to at least be a step in the right direction), but I just had to point out that while an argument like this might seem based in only opinion, anyone with a little art training will realize that that there are definative "rights" and "wrongs" in the art community, and even more so in the design world. The XP style is mostly "wrong." It's the result of an ill-advised corporated campaign to make computers seem less indimedating to Grandma, and we ended up with very little aestetic value.

Re:Just forget it

[kwark]

This kind of application deployment is under development for KDE:
http://dot.kde.org/1126867980/

"If you are bit security concerned, you may want to know what klik does to your system. Here's the pitch:

        * Its .cmg files are self-contained AppDirs (applications directories), compressed into a cramfs or zisofs file system.
        * To run the contained app, klik mounts the bundle file underneath /tmp/app/1/ and runs it from there; if mounted, the bundle looks like it is a subdirectory expanded into the real directory structure of the host.

It's very much similar to how applications on Mac OS X works.... "

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

A "staggering disconnect with reality", is it? I wonder on whose part.

Re:Just forget it

[misleb]

Mounting filesystems for each app seems a little awkward to use and maintain. And potentially problematic. One thing I like about .app bundles is that they are just directories (although the directoryness is somewhat hidden by teh Finder). So it is trivial to go in an view/modify the resources for an app. I can open/edit .nib (GUI layout) files, replace icons, whatever. Not that I do this too often, of course, but it is nice to have such transparency to go along with the ease of use.

Also, I wonder what they'll do about the more basic problem in Linux of library incompatabilities or dependencies. What commercial vendors have traditionally done is just statically link binaries to avoid dependency problems. It can be kinda tricky to make a non-trivial Linux binary that will Just Work on any Linux system. I wonder how binary compatable KDE apps are between minor, or even major versions. Will developers be forced to include the KDE libs they require with every package? That would be very wasteful and inefficient.

-matthew

Re:Just forget it

[InsaneProcessor]

The main problem with Vista is that "there is nothing new invented here". All of the applications in use today cannot be improved by going to 64 bit (accept a small set of engineering & scientific apps). Nobody can name a single benifit of Vista for Internet usage, playing music or watching movies.

We have had 64 bit WinXP for quite a while and there is a void of anything special to run under it, except for a couple of games.

The only people who NEED Vista is M$ to charge more for the end product and increase profits (or just keep them going). It provides no benefit to the consumer at all.

When M$ can invent something new and productive, then it will be good.

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

Big fan of Fisher-Price, are you?

Re:Just forget it

[Andrzej Sawicki]

Are you sure the way your office looks does not affect the way you a) do you work and b) feel after work? Does that not relate to the way your desktop looks? I do not mean the effect on others (the "bling"), but on you personally (colors and shapes you prefer -- stuff like that).

Re:Just forget it

[Captain Splendid]

Exactly. Who the hell is Vista marketed to anyway? Home users have XP, which, despite its numerous faults, just plain works. Granted Big corps will probably swallow up a ton of licenses without even blinking, but you still have the same problem: there's no killer app/functionality on Vista that you can't get from XP.

Time for MS to do what Apple did: bite the bullet and start from scratch, otherwise its diminishing returns from here on out.

Re:Just forget it

[yo_tuco]

"Nobody can name a single benifit of Vista for Internet usage, playing music or watching movies."

I bet the RIAA and MPAA could name a few.

Re:Just forget it

[cHiphead]

I didn't take it that way at all. The XP theme is a POS and it eats system resources with all the 'effects' it wastes on window sizing/fake 3d buttons and taskbar/etc. The only thing that grew on me from XP was the new start menu which let me be lazy with 2 clicks for outlook (for work email) and allowing me to unclutter my quicklaunch. But even that took 2 years for me to finally start preferring. The XP theme looks unprofessional, like it belongs on an XBox or a kids 'disney' themed computer.

Cheers.

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't claim to speak for everyone on the planet, but I, personally, think you have severe taste problems. The classic Windows scheme wasn't pretty, but neither was it ugly. It was neutral and functional, which is all you need, really. The XP scheme was big and clunky and cheap-looking. If it had been made from real materials it would have been cheap plastic.

What I've seen of Vista hasn't been hideous, but, as has already been mentioned, it's not really necessary. I have a problem with use of translucency in all but a very particular circumstances, but I'm sure you can turn all that sort of thing off. Just so long as it doesn't cause a drain on resources, I suppose it's bearable.

Re:Just forget it

[Enderandrew]

There is no real reason for anyone to upgrade to Vista. I can say that because I tried it. I infer that you have not, and that you have not run a 64-bit operating system. Everything shows improvements when compiled for 64-bit. There are varying levels of improvement, but it is there, and it is significant.

The easiest way to demonstrate this is with a Gentoo install. Take the exact same system and compile it with the exact same flags, but compile it for a 32-bit host, and then recompile it for 64-bit. Benchmark both.

I run both Windows x64 and Gentoo x64. Trust me, there are advantages to compiling and running in 64-bit mode.

In addition, there are advantages to XP users to jump to Windows x64. x64 is based off Server 2003, has a more stable kernel, and is just about to get a brand spanking new service pack as well.

Re:Just forget it

[HermMunster]

I have turned off only one special effect in OSX and that is the genie effect. I never turned on the icon zoom and i set the icons in their task bar to be a certain size. That's it. Other than that I keep everything on at full throttle and I enjoy the interface. I do not see Vista as a real competitor to OSX because it just doesn't have the pinache that OSX has. Look at feature additions and software development tools. OSX kicks Vista's butt in that regard.

Also, OSX features can be run on most G3 and up Macs whereas Microsoft's excessiveness in programming won't run AERO in on a video card with significantly more capabilities.

Re:Just forget it

[cbhacking]

XP "just plain works" the way 98 "just plain works" which is to say fine for its time but nearly archaic now. For example, no operating system should be run with the user having full permissions all the time. In XP it is *possible* to run as a LUA and still fully use with your system, but it's a pain - Run As... only goes so far, and if you start a program without admin privileges and need them later, your screwed... close it and start again as admin. Vista handles this by allowing programs to change their permissions, while running, at the press of a button. You only have to recover a couple of otherwise completely lost/changed documents via Volume Shadow Copies ("Previous Versions") to recognize how valuable it is. Yes, it's available on 2003. I know exactly two people who use 2003 on the desktop, and it takes a bit of tinkering to do really well there (enable DirectX if you want games, for example). Vista uses address space randomization to fight return-to-libc attacks. Something no ordinary user will ever notice, and very few would understand... but it, along with data execute protection (yes, XP has DEP) have the potential to really prevent buffer overruns from doing anything serious (arbitrary code execution). I have yet to see a desktop search solution that works as handily as Vista's, although Spotlight comes close. Even the best third-party solution (which requires additional installation) isn't as easy as WinKey then start typing, then click or hit enter. DirectX 10 has the potential to make an incredible leap in graphics performance. Once the new games come out, you can bet many gamers will gladly take Vista just for that. Protected Mode is the way every browser should run. Nothing stops a user from doing something truly stupid, but protected mode makes it a little clearer what is and isn't smart. It also means that even if somebody does compromise the browser, the won't be able to DO anything with it, unless the user allows them (contrary to a common /. argument, users actually do notice if something - like a UAC prompt - jumps up at them when they don't expect it, and there's a pretty decent chance whey won't automatically click okay). There are a dozen other things, ranging from built-in calendar to the ability to run Tablet tools and Media Centr on the same machine, that guarantees people will buy. Those who don't upgrade will buy a new computer in a few years. People probably will buy it just for the eye candy, to be honest... people who don't want to buy a Mac or learn how to deal with Linux, but want a pretty, "next-gen" desktop to show off. Heck, I've gotten a number of people in the CSE depratment who were excited to see Vista... and asked me to demo the new UI tricks.

Re:Just forget it

[HermMunster]

I saw, and alot of people I know agree, a big reason to upgrade to xp and I liked the new interface. But I paid for my XP and I don't really see a reason to pay more for a reworking of the theme and some security enhancements that could have been added with an SP3. And if they don't add them in a SP3 then they are intentionally leaving us out to the wolves? Why is this an important question? It is important because XP is by no means obsolete and the vast majority of users have no reason to upgrade. XP is competent enough with today's available resources to last for a good 5 years more. Had Vista come out with some incredibly appealing new technology or technology that would damn those that didn't upgrade I could see people not asking that question.

Microsoft wants Vista so they have more control over your system. How many of you have made it important to let Microsoft know you don't want their DRM infections and you aren't interested in their facilties to keep you from using your computer the way you want? It is your computer. You can write letters, make phone calls, and generally cause a stir if you don't like a feature enough. You should speak up. Vista simply extends on what Microsoft has been doing for some time--making small incremental encroachments into your computer and just biting their tongue until the furor dies down. Then they add a bit more and bite their tongues again.

Vista is their chance to incorporate all that they have done--including the Genuine Advantage Notification program that we all complained about. They are adding features to make content use significantly more vendor protective. We want our content without DRM and without someone spying on us and without accusing us of being criminals because we want to do this stuff our way instead of theirs.

Microsoft has clearly stated that Windows has gone from content creation to content consumption and they are reacting to that. This version of Windows is meant for content consumption and protectionism of digital rights even if it is done in a way that destroys our choice--as most DRM schemes do.

Frankly, I want my computer and its contents protected from the content creators more than I want the mega corps content protected from me. I am not out stealing their content nor distributing it. I don't want protection schemes installed on my computer with or without my knowledge and I don't want it done any more than I would want them coming into my home and monitoring my content consumption. The computer is an extension of my home and not a platform for their content and advertising--that's what Microsoft doesn't understand.

Putting programs like the Genuine Advantage Notification program on people's computer is akin to calling us all thieves and it is a mechanism of monitoring that is prohibited in most forms--how would you like the government monitoring everyone's homes for potential criminal activity by putting cameras in every area of your home or by making you go through regular inspections? How would you like it if every software vendor out there created the same type of protection schemes--now you have 10 or 20 different programs all monitoring your computer use, checking you for theft of their content, etc? That would be like the federal government watching you, the state government with cameras in your home, the county government monitoring you on your property, and the city doing regular inspections of everyone's home at any time of the day or night? Included in this would be the DHS, NSA, CIA, FBI, IRS, and every other government agency being able to monitor you too. By allowing one company to do it--Microsoft--you are allowing everyone else to do it too.

Allowing Microsoft to put such a tool into your computer--as well as other DRM schemes--is doing essentially just that because when you allow Microsoft to justify that behavior/conduct you justify everyone that produces any sort of software to do that.

Why is that?

It is that way because Microsoft is no more entitled to

Re:Just forget it

[drsmithy]

The main problem with Vista is that "there is nothing new invented here". All of the applications in use today cannot be improved by going to 64 bit (accept a small set of engineering & scientific apps). Nobody can name a single benifit of Vista for Internet usage, playing music or watching movies.

Well, that's largely because there simply isn't anything new that needs to be done for such basic, single-purpose tasks. If all you want is a dumb terminal to run a handful of applications now and then, there haven't been any improvements for ~15 years.

When M$ can invent something new and productive, then it will be good.

There's not really anything "new and productive" that *can* be invented, by the standards you appear to be using.

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

is it just me, or does 'windows server' without the 'windows gui' kinda seem a bit silly? i'm all for stripped down servers, but take away the 'easy management' of a windows server and i don't see much worth keeping... damn, i have modded on this thread so i have to post anon

Re:Just forget it

[jp10558]

And the big problem is something that MS probably ought have come up with 10 years ago, like a search box for stuff in your start menu, turns out to not be quite what I expected, and I already have a program to do that in XP.

The eye candy is nice, but mostly a waste of resources - plus the major difference is retraining time spent finding things which seem to have been moved for no good reason.

You know what I really liked about Vista so far? The Mahjong game... But not worth all the differences.

At least with XP they got something right - the ability to get the classic interface back. And that is possible with Vista too - to a point, I didn't see a classic version of the control panel, for instince - but I may have missed it.

Re:Just forget it

[drsmithy]

Also, OSX features can be run on most G3 and up Macs [...]

I think you mean "walked". OS X barely "runs" on machines only a year old.

[...] whereas Microsoft's excessiveness in programming won't run AERO in on a video card with significantly more capabilities.

Note that OS X doesn't use the video card for those fancy effects on low end Macs that don't have sufficiently advanced GPUs, it does them all in software on the main CPU. The only difference between Microsoft and Apple is that Microsoft didn't bother writing any software fallback to handle the eye candy on old, less capable machines. There are numerous perfectly valid reasons why Microsoft and Apple approached this issue in different ways, and none of them have anything to do with "excessiveness in programming".

(I find it hilarious that an OS X advocate is attacking another platform for "excessiveness in programming". This is an OS that struggles to be responsive on a barely loaded 2Ghz G5-based machine).

Re:Just forget it

[Anonymous Coward]

I run both Windows x64 and Gentoo x64. Trust me, there are advantages to compiling and running in 64-bit mode.

What you are testing is not 64-bit vs. 32-bit, it's native vs. the backwards compatibility layer (inside the CPU).

32 vs 64-bit has nothing to do with speed. It's the size of numbers. Being able to count to 2^64-1 instead of 2^32-1 does not make 2+2 happen any faster. Normal consumers don't have any use for numbers that big. Scientist do, when they need to calculate the circumference of the earth in millimeters.

Re:Just forget it

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

i'm all for stripped down servers, but take away the 'easy management' of a windows server and i don't see much worth keeping

The point of this that MS is trying to push is that you get both. "Server Core" with just the minimum services required will improve performance, minimize the attack angles, will be less security updates required to push, etc. However, the management interface doesn't really change its just that you cannot run thost tools locally. Running the MMC snap-ins on a seperate server though gives you the same tools your used to to manage the remote "stripped down" server.

Of course you can do some mangement if you'd want via the command line, but the goal is to just manage it remotely via the MMC snap-ins.

Shell...

[skogs]

This is a shell like the Great Wall of China is simply a wall.

I little bit bigger than it needs to be?

Yes.

A little bit cool and worthy of inspection and use?

Yes.

Cool?

I guess that remains to be seen.

It is however, not like any other shell.

Re:Shell...

[daeg]

More importantly, we probably shouldn't trust Windows for defense systems any more than the Chinese should have trusted the Great Wall.

Re:Shell...

[DurendalMac]

Yeah, it is like another shell: Mac OS X. Some of the UI implementations are such blatant ripoffs that it's not even funny. I'd like to ask these guys what it's like to use Apple as their R&D department, even when they're spending BILLIONS in their own R&D.

Re:Shell...

[Anonymous Coward]

Theyd probably say they dont use Windows, ever.

Re:Shell...

[Anonymous Coward]

Somehow I knew my 2nd post comment would end up buried in a sea of windows this and windows that. Wow. At least half way down the page because nobody could resist replying to redundant obvious comments.

Re:Shell...

[jazman_777]

It is however, not like any other shell.

It's a graphical shell on a boot virus.

My Internal Struggle

[TrippTDF]

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others. I think this is something that geeks hold especially true, so when I see some sort of error with a computer system, I try to figure out what the developers were thinking when they put the thing together.

But when it comes to some windows issues... I'm at a loss. I actually have to ask myself how, in good faith, a developer implemented something that either works poorly or not at all. Why keep that "feature" in there (espeically when talking about a GUI) when it doesn't work as adertised?

I think my answer lies somewhere in management.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[kalirion]

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others.

Most people action in what they, perhaps subconciously, perceive to be the best interests of themselves. It just happens that being a dick to people is usually not in a person's best interests. BOCTAOE

Re:My Internal Struggle

[goldspider]

"I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others. I think this is something that geeks hold especially true"

Ahh, so that explains why so many geeks download copyrighted music, movies, and software they haven't paid for.

Yes, it's offtopic, but I thought your analysis was most interesting.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[pubjames]

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others.

I think you're probably right. However, it is a sad fact that this isn't true of most people that get into positions of power - you generally don't get into a position of power by thinking of others.

I think my answer lies somewhere in management.

Bingo.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[pubjames]

Most people action in what they, perhaps subconciously, perceive to be the best interests of themselves.

If that were true mankind would die out very quickly. Nobody would have kids.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Otter]

I'm at a loss. I actually have to ask myself how, in good faith, a developer implemented something that either works poorly or not at all.

Man, if you have this much existential angst over unreleased software (have you even used a beta of Vista?), I sure hope you never get near Lotus Notes!

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Digital Vomit]

"I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others. I think this is something that geeks hold especially true"

Ahh, so that explains why so many geeks download copyrighted music, movies, and software they haven't paid for.

Well, ignoring modern copyright laws is technically in the best interests of others (i.e. society as a whole, as opposed to the big media companies) since modern copyright law stifles the progress of the sciences and useful arts.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Digital Vomit]

That being said, I encourage people to still buy the stuff they pirate (if they can afford it). It's just that copyright terms should be more reasonable, like five years or so.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[lisaparratt]

In a world before social security, who else would look after them when they were old and frail?

Re:My Internal Struggle

[plague3106]

Actually I'd think that would explain why people have kids; they want the kid (for some ingrained biological reason), but they often don't think if they can properly take care of said child. Having a kid which you can't care for is not in the kids best interest.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Foofoobar]

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others

This goes against social order. People act in the best interest of THEMSELVES FIRST, and if the individual isn't sociopathic, they excercise empathy towards others and generally will act in others best interests unless it impacts their own self interests anbd goals.

So applied to a corporation, the corporation is always going to do what IT THINKS is in ITS best interest first and then, if they feel any empathy towards you, you may get treated well by default.

Now knowing that techies in general DESPISE end users and think them all stupid (it's true), you can assume that Microsoft has lost some empathy towards its end users and will only due whats best for them as long as it directly benefits Microsoft.

As a nice comparison, Open Source has nothing to gain except for adoption rate. And the only way to increase adoption rate is to PANDER to end users.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[littlem]

You know you're reading Slashdot when... someone says it would be in their own best interest never to have sex!

Re:My Internal Struggle

[OneoFamillion]

On a slightly related note, I reckon that being a dick is the way to go when being accompanied by pussies. Not that I would know, of course. I suck at human relationships on more literal, non-literal and numerous levels than you can possibly imagine.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[goldspider]

How exactly do I benefit society when I dowload the latest "Priates of the Caribbean"? (no pun intended)

Activism is one thing. That is not activism.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[tetabiate]

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others

Me thinks - you misspelled "themselves".

Re:My Internal Struggle

[lotrtrotk]

I'm at a loss. I actually have to ask myself how, in good faith, a developer implemented something that either works poorly or not at all. Why keep that "feature" in there (espeically when talking about a GUI) when it doesn't work as adertised?

Because it's his (the developer's) job to implement the designs created by the Project Managers. The developer is not (nor should he be) responsible for poor design & planning. If the design is flawed, it's not his job to re-design it.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Digital Vomit]

How exactly do I benefit society when I dowload the latest "Priates of the Caribbean"? (no pun intended)

You're helping to reduce the power of modern copyright laws by disobeying them. The more people who do that, the closer we get to fixing the copyright problem.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[pilgrim23]

Since support (that is managment mucking with it) has been dropped,it might just be the oportunity we have been lookin for to upgrade to the one stable Microsoft product: Windows 98

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this labeled "funny"? It is obvious the poster has used Lotus Notes. It has to be one of the worse interfaces on the face of this planet. Trying to work in the thing is similar to driving finishing nails with a 35lb sledgehammer.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[TrippTDF]

Actually- I never have! I've stayed as FAR away from it as possible, based on other's reactions...

Re:My Internal Struggle

[cpt kangarooski]

There are three distinct, and equal interests that society has here. 1) It wants the greatest number of original works to be created and published. 2) It wants the greatest number of derivative works to be created and published. 3) It wants total freedom with regard to those works.

Copyright is an attempt to partially defer satisfaction of the latter two interests in order to cause an increase in the first interest that outweighs the cost of the deferment. That is, we try to give up a little for now, in order to get a lot in the long run; more than we'd get otherwise.

The third interest deals with your question. It is in society's interests to have knowledge spread, enjoyed, preserved, put to practical use, etc. It is good for people to be engaged in their culture. And if people can do so for no or minimal cost, they're more likely to. Unauthorized reproduction does this. It runs counter to the larger plan of copyright, which defers some immediate gratification for greater rewards in the end, however. That's really the only reason why it is objectionable. When it doesn't run counter to the plan, the work is just placed in the public domain (either in whole, or in part via the scope-limited nature of copyright) and then while the reproduction is just as unauthorized, it's totally legal.

It's not activism. But it's not immoral or anything either. It's really just counter-productive.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Short Circuit]

I don't think you can use that as a logical response, because the concept of the effects of art and technology as they benefit the group is not instinctive.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[crabpeople]

"If that were true mankind would die out very quickly. Nobody would have kids."

Well why do you think it evolved to be so pleasureable?

Re:My Internal Struggle

[tinker_taylor]

I think it is more due to a lack of synergy between different groups/sub-contracting firms writing up different pieces of the code (rather than the overall design and technical specs themselves).

Eg:

Take Application myApp and break it down into 10 functional portions and give 10 different groups/firms each portion to develop (along with the individual specs). Because each of the 10 groups might not necessarily know the final purpose of the appication, and perhaps due to some really shoddy project management, what could have been an excellent product, simply turns into an inefficient, non-productive entity with 10 individually sound components but useless (or at least buggy) when working in conjunction with each other.

I believe us humans are like that too...in a social network.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. You keep telling yourself that, thief.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[StikyPad]

Yeah, because we all know how much women hate babies. They only have them because they feel it's their duty, and without their selfless acts, there would be no people.

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Digital Vomit]

theft

Re:My Internal Struggle

[tehcyder]

How exactly do I benefit society when I dowload the latest "Priates of the Caribbean"? (no pun intended)

Well, hopefully you are denying some cash to the type of organisation that makes films like "Pirates of the Carribean 2" with the result that that they have a reduced ability to make future films like "Pirates of the Carribean 3".

Re:My Internal Struggle

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem quite eager to apologize for crimes such as identity theft and theft of services. Please seek psychological help before the criminal justice system does it for you.

Bad name

[radicalskeptic]

"Shell Revealed"? I think "Shell Shocked" would have been a much more apt name :-/

Re:Bad name

[Ajehals]

Shell Reviled

Re:Bad name

[Morphine007]

troll? I laughed when I read it... it may be in bad taste, but I wouldn't call this a troll, there's nothing really to reply to, except the dysfunctional moderation.

Not a bad idea, but...

[urbanradar]

Not a bad idea, but I have my doubts that posting problems or opinions to that blog would make much difference. The noise ratio of comments would just be too high. Seems more like a marketing thing. They're trying to be all hip and with it, so they make a blog to make people feel all warm and fuzzy inside because Microsoft is actually personally listening to *their* input and criticism!

Re:Not a bad idea, but...

[plague3106]

Why do you believe that? Blog comments have influenced VS2005, MSbuild, etc. Why would Vista be different?

Re:Not a bad idea, but...

[urbanradar]

Why do you believe that? Blog comments have influenced VS2005, MSbuild, etc. Why would Vista be different?

You can use Windows without even knowing what MSbuild is, but there's no real abundance of people out there using Windows without ever having come in contact with the GUI. So it seems to me that the GUI is something a lot more people would have an opinion on, compared to the relatively specialised things you mentioned. Especially since nowadays, a new version of Windows is major news not just within the IT industry, but in nearly all walks of life. Basically, I wouldn't be surprised if every man and his dog had their own (often rather uneducated/ignorant, as these things tend to go) opinion on how the Vista shell "ought to" work.

And that's why I predict a higher noise ratio for the comments on that particular blog. (I'm actually quite surprised at my original post being modded Flamebait. Is what I'm saying that unreasonable?)

Re:Not a bad idea, but...

[plague3106]

You can use Windows without even knowing what MSbuild is, but there's no real abundance of people out there using Windows without ever having come in contact with the GUI. So it seems to me that the GUI is something a lot more people would have an opinion on, compared to the relatively specialised things you mentioned. Especially since nowadays, a new version of Windows is major news not just within the IT industry, but in nearly all walks of life. Basically, I wouldn't be surprised if every man and his dog had their own (often rather uneducated/ignorant, as these things tend to go) opinion on how the Vista shell "ought to" work.

At the end of the day though, users are users. Developers are the primary uses of VS and msbuild. They might not be the best, indeed, I bet there are quite a few crumby ones out there, and there is / was quite a bit of noise in these blogs as well.

That said, some 'stupid' person may come up with a valid point nonetheless. If 85% of Vista users complain about a particular UI problem, don't you think that warrants a change?

And that's why I predict a higher noise ratio for the comments on that particular blog. (I'm actually quite surprised at my original post being modded Flamebait. Is what I'm saying that unreasonable?)

There's always going to be a high noise ratio; that doesn't mean it will be impossible to find good comments. And if the 'noise' is about one thing, I'd think that one thing will need changing if its being bashed by the majority. That's who they are targeting after all, the majority.

I don't think your comment was modded fairly, FWIW...

Another Microsoft Propaganda Outlet

[Anonymous Coward]

propaganda (prp-gnd)
n.
  1. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.


and because MS shell team have a blog makes something more credible ?

Blog is the just the 21st century word for HOEMPAGE (ala geocities circa 1996) in fact reading anything on a blog automatically lowers its credibility score just as reading someones opinion on Geocities or AOL does
except this time its bought, paid for and staffed by Microsoft, and if i wanted to chat do you think anything would change because of my comments ? see bugtraq and all those unpatched IE vunerabilities for example
not to mention why i should contribute my ideas (for free) to a multi-billion dollar company to profit from

i wouldnt give MS the time let alone any ideas of how to make an OS better, ill save those for something the world can benefit from (FOSS), enjoy the silence MS

Eye Candy Good, Need for super computer bad

[corroncho]

I don't mind all the eye candy. Some if it's new, some not. But the thing that baffles me is that Microsoft needs the equivalent of a super computer's worth in graphics processing to make the stuff work. I haven;t seen anyting that I feel warrant that kind of power. Have you seen OpenGL? All the eye candy, and it runs on my old laptop.

___________________________

Free iPods? Its legit. 5 of my friends got theirs. Get yours here!

Re:Eye Candy Good, Need for super computer bad

[TheNetAvenger]

People seem to confuse the 'Glass' eye candy and the actual specifications behind the WDDM driver model that 'Glass' requires.

Here is the thing, sure Glass could potentially run on a lot lower hardware, as the effects are not hard to do; however, this is NOT what the specifications or the WDDM are about.

The Glass is the pretty 'examples' of the new graphical engine in Vista, but there is a whole new paradigm in play that offers things no other OS technology currently even comes close to addressing.

A quick reference is things like the WDDM model allow GPU multi-tasking, GPU Memory virtualization, and several other concepts that will even push the next generation of what ATI and NVIDIA are doing.

WDDM and the 'pretty glass' are very much a part of each other in Vista, but also when you see Halo running with great FPS, in a window beside Star Wars Galaxies and in a window beside a new CAD or WPF 3D applicaiton, you realize that moving the 3D model from a 'single' applicaiton concept is more of what vista is about.

Also think about the applications I just mentioned and hit Flip3D, and watch all these games and applications run with full FPS in a slanted window side by side all other applications. This is what WDDM gives the users and developers and Glass is just a pretty example of WDDM being in use. If you want just animation and eye candy, people wrote utilities that did this under WindwosXP using GDI+, that is not what is special about the WDDM changes in Vista, truly.

MS has started posting more on these technologies and what they are and why they are. A good place to read up on the WDDM and some of the graphical changes in the whole Vista OS for semi-laymen can be found at:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/

There are more 'techie' articles on this for people interested, and even just a bit of reading you will see why the WDDM is different and how it can drop several 3D application on a desktop that all want or assume 'exclusive' GPU access and GPU memory and yet run in parallel and not starve for GPU RAM. So 3D tech nerds, some of this is pretty impressive and is a good indication where ATI and NVIdia will be going forward in terms of new ways of offering GPU abilities.

Kitchen Computer?

[Rik Sweeney]

http://shellrevealed.com/photos/blog_images/images /584/original.aspx

Everytime I see this I can't help but chuckle. I can just imagine a family with their Kitchen, Bathroom and Basement Computers. I can just see the kitchen computer sending a message to the bathroom computer telling the person in there that their microwave burrito is ready...

Re:Kitchen Computer?

[malakai]

Guilty.

Have a kitchen computer with wireless mouse and keyboard, mainly used for recipes/google. Have a basement computer which is tucked out of the way in a closet because the fan bearing makes a unsettling noise. I then have the media computer which is the xbox (Could call it Familyroom PC). And then the two desktops and one laptop elsewhere.

Now, for me, naming them Phoenix, Vega, Ripley, Hermes... whatever is ok. But for people like my parents, naming it "Kitchen" and "Basement" is more in tuned with how they visualize things. Remeber, this whole article is about UI design, which is about getting in the heads of non-techies. Think through things the way they think through them.

Non-techies would name their bathroom pc "Bathroom PC".

I just hope they use VOX to control it.

Delays

[Ajehals]

What they don't have anything else to do?
Finished everything have we?
or is this a marketing ploy?

Remember folks - make sure any idea you pass on is either patented by you (possibly evil) or that there is a little prior art out there. :)

- Having a bad day -

100% correct

[brunes69]

Have you seen OpenGL? All the eye candy, and it runs on my old laptop.

I think you mean Xgl, but your point is still valid. For anyone who has not seen Xgl in action, head over to YouTube and search up some videos.

I have Xgl running on my Xp1800 computer with a Geforce2MX video card from 2000 in it, and it is *smoking fast*, and the effects are far beyond anything that Vista does. The parent is really 100% correct - why does Microsoft need this much CPU power to do it's (relatively simple) GFX in Vista? Seems like they are a bit behind the times in terms of software here.

Re:100% correct

[corroncho]

Thanks for the correction. I did mean XGL.

Re:100% correct

[stubear]

I've seen the XGL video, there's nothing in there that Vista can't do and in fact some of the stuff Longhorn did but was removed from Vista. The rest was OSX and we know that Windows XP can do everything OSX does though you need to download third party utilities to do them. Eye candy is not necessarily productive and remember the businesses are Microsoft's biggest client base.

Re:100% correct

[Anonymous Coward]

Good job missing the point. Why does it take so much CPU / GPU power to do that kind of stuff on Vista was what he was getting at.

Re:100% correct

[roman_mir]

video
another video
yet another video

I looked at those videos, I found them to be cool in terms of the special effects that the desktop is offering. I also never want to use a computer that way. Any time I am infront of a machine that has any of those special features turned on (sliding menues even, shadows, windows showing contents while dragging etc.,) I just turn them off.

Re:100% correct

[NekSnappa]

You missed the parents point. He wasn't saying that Vista couldn't do these things. He was saying that Vista requires a great deal more resources to do the same thing.

Re:100% correct

[Phisbut]

I think you mean Xgl, but your point is still valid. For anyone who has not seen Xgl in action, head over to YouTube and search up some videos.

Yes, I have seen Xgl in action, I have even used Xgl for a while on my box. While the spinning cube and the wobbling windows are nice and all, it is simply hell when you try to simply resize a window. I don't know the inner-workings of Xgl, but how can they make such 3D stuff and wobbling windows so efficient, while totally killing the actual usefulness of managing windows by resizing them? They don't show *that* in the videos.

I'll use Xgl again when I see a video of a window being resized as fast as it is with a regular 2D desktop.

Re:100% correct

[orasio]

That might be a problem with default configuration, because of the constant development in that specific area.
For example, wobbly is good, if it affects only regular and splash windows. With tooltips and menus it's just annoying, but if you uncheck "unknown" windows, it works great, and doesn't bother regular work. It feels very natural to have windows move as if they were actual physical objects.

With that exact change in config, it work perfectly, and is very nice to use, things like unfolding the cube are neat, and the rotating switcher is great at giving you the whole idea of your desktop.
Its nice to have a fast spatially oriented multiple desktop configuration.

Re:100% correct

[HoosierPeschke]

why does Microsoft need this much CPU power to do it's (relatively simple) GFX in Vista?

Kickbacks to hardware companies? A sale on a new computer will net more cash than an upgrade? P*ss poor programming?

Re:100% correct

[JustNiz]

>> why does Microsoft need this much CPU power to do it's (relatively simple) GFX in Vista?

Because they never sweep old code away, They just build layers of on layers on layers. Its quicker and easier (and dirtier) than actually doing proper refactoring. Microsoft engineers get recognition/rewards from Microsoft by coming up with a new schema, when all they've done is encapsulate an old macro-based API with another layer of macros so microsoft can then say they developed a new technology like .net, COM+, COM, OLE whatever.

Also, their most of their developers are all new grads (read: cheaper) so know their stuff academically but lack practical development experience, so don't automatically do things like think about performance while developing.

Re:100% correct

[roman_mir]

I do not view desktop as a physical object though, thus I do not want it to behave like one. But it's me, whatever rocks your boat.

Re:100% correct

[namekuseijin]

"the effects are far beyond anything that Vista does"

hey, i'm an Xgl fan myself, but let's not blow smoke, ok? There's the useless jello windows that i'd gladly switch for Aero's ability to draw stuff underneath transparent layers with a distinct Gaussian Blur. It's good because that way things are not so confusing: you can read first plane stuff without writings underneath getting in the way. OTOH, it's bad because of the same thing, for control freaks...

granted, putting Gaussian blur in Xgl doesn't seem that difficult...

Re:100% correct

[orasio]

Of course you don't, but your eyes and brain are designed to recognize actual physical objects, not abstractions of them. Of course, the screen you are looking at is a physical object, and it's easier to understand at a lower level, and then being able to exploit things like spatial memory, and that kind stuff we have.

Re:100% correct

[Anonymous Coward]

It's already there. The compiz plugin is called 'blur', and it does exactly that.

Re:100% correct

[TomorrowPlusX]

To answer the question -- from screenshots I've seen of Vista -- the answer is that vista performs some per-pixel convolutions. For example, the blurring effect on the titlebars of what's beneath is actually a fairly expensive computation. I've done GLSL gaussian convolutions, and without taking a number of shortcuts ( specifically, bi-directional separation, and performing my blur on an averaged/downsampled copy ) my nVIDIA 5200 barely made 7 fps on a 800x600 scene. I know, 5200 == crappy card, but it's what's in my powerbook.

Anyway, those per-pixel convolutions are hideously expensive. Simple alpha blending and geometric transforms are, in comparison, essentially free, and that's what XGL is doing.

Now, what MS does with it is very conservative ( not to mention unimaginative ) compared to XGL, but I wanted to answer your question. Vista: simple effects performed in about the most computationally expensive manner. XGL: clever, brilliant effects done in a computationally inexpensive manner.

There you go.

Now, why vista requires a fast processor is obvious. To sell new computers :P

Re:100% correct

[BRSQUIRRL]

Amen...I have wondered the same thing. I mean, back in college, I had a PII-400, a 3Dfx Voodoo2 card, 128MB of RAM and 3D-intensive games like Quake II ran very well. All Windows has to do is render and animate simple stuff like buttons, windows, pull-down menus, etc. and it requires a freaking Pixar rendering cluster? Just how incompetent are their GUI developers?

Re:100% correct

[cowens]

Resizing is still done by the tool kit (Gtk, QT, etc.) if you want it to be live. The tool kits are not yet GL aware. Moving, minimizing, changing desktops, etc are all done by the window manager (Compiz or Metacity). The latest versions of Compiz (actually its plugins) supports a method of resizing where you specify the new size with a either a texture that is a screenshot of the app or a colored rectangle. I would not call it smoking fast because the tool kit still has to update the widgets after you specify the new size, but it is a massive improvment.

If...

[UltimApe]

If I can get aero's under the hood benifits (graphic card rendering of windows, graphic card ram virtualization)) with the "classic" gui, I might think about buying vista. Time and time again I run into problems where it's not my program, but the display that causes me problems.

Re:If...

[Anonymous Coward]

You should be happy to know that they have kept the classic interface as an option.
It turns off all the fancy transparency and leaves you the Windows 2000 look.
They also have a Aero basic look that sorta looks like Aero but without the transparency.

Re:If...

[OnyxIR]

But if you aren't upgrading to Vista for the eye-candy, then what ARE you upgrading for?

Re:If...

[Anonymous Coward]

BUT! You forgot that Clasic and Aero basic are both software rendered, they dont use the same 3d accelerated desktop interface that grandparent wants, all he wants is windows classic accellerated by his video card none of the fancy blur or other effects, same desktop, newer better technology behind it. Unfortunately hes stuck with software rendering cause microsoft couldnt be bothered to upgrade the existing OS parts.

Re:If...

[Anonymous Coward]

This turns off all UI effects, including aero:

Right-click Computer -> Properties -> Advanced Settings -> Performance Settings -> Adjust for best Performance.

Vista runs even faster than XP for most things once you do this.

Re:If...

[UltimApe]

maybe an aero skin that looks and acts like classic then? I wonder how that would run.

Out Of Order

[brunes69]

I can just see the kitchen computer sending a message to the bathroom computer telling the person in there that their microwave burrito is ready...

You've got things reversed there. The microwave burrito comes first, then the bathroom.

Re:Out Of Order

[Anonymous Coward]

Still wrong. More like when the burrito gets delivered, the kitchen computer informs the bathroom computer to expect a visit imminently and to turn on the fan.

Re:Out Of Order

[Rik Sweeney]

No no no, you've missed the point! Imagine it like this:

You're sitting on the can, straining away (as you do) and then suddenly the computer in the room (the Bathroom Computer) pops up a message alert:

"Kitchen Computer says: Your Burrito is ready"

House of tomorrow? I think so...

Re:Out Of Order

[Churla]

I can imagine it as some kinda of SNMP trap sent from the microwave to the toilet warning it of "abusive traffic headed your way"

When I pay for it, just MAKE IT WORK!!!

[pandrijeczko]

Somebody who generously gives their time freely to develop an operating system or an application that I find useful deserves my support and feedback - equally the case if that free application runs on Windows. They might even deserve a charitable donation from me, because that is my choice.

However, somebody who *sells* me a product for my hard-earned money is duty-bound, under numerous trade description acts in various countries, to deliver the product as stated on the packaging and within the marketing of that product. If I do not receive that product as described, then they are obligated to either fix the problem or give me my money back. End of story.

Sorry, I am not giving over my valuable time and commentary freely just to fatten the profits of any global megacorp...

Re:When I pay for it, just MAKE IT WORK!!!

[NullProg]

However, somebody who *sells* me a product for my hard-earned money is duty-bound, under numerous trade description acts in various countries, to deliver the product as stated on the packaging and within the marketing of that product.

Didn't you read the fine print? Microsoft only leases software now, they don't sell anything.

Enjoy,

WOW!

[diegocgteleline.es]

A new blog on the Internets.

Slow news day?

bash in windows?

[Phantom of the Opera]

lets not get carried away here

OK, what were ya thinkin?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

I see you have one of those web sites with the dark brown backgrounds with off-white, off-off-white, salmon and off-salmon text in little bitty fonts. Trying to read it makes me squint and my head hurt.

What was that about eye-candy?

Read the EULA

[Anonymous Coward]

Basically, if you read the EULA .. you will see that many of the responsibilities you desire are basically thrown away. Don't like it .. don't click "I agree", instead simply return the product. Basically, they are saying .. we offer no guarantee it works, but we did make some effort. In fact, I think it might even say don't use it for anything critical (I am not sure though .. have to check). So then, now it's up to YOU to pay money and accept the risk.

As for the packaging .. all it says is the product name .. minimum requirements .. and pretty coloring. Nothing about a highly responsive UI that never crashes even if you run crappy drivers or apps.

Re:Read the EULA

[Mistshadow2k4]

Basically, if you read the EULA .. you will see that many of the responsibilities you desire are basically thrown away. Don't like it .. don't click "I agree", instead simply return the product.

That's what the EULA says, but often the law doesn't agree. It doesn't matter what Microsoft or any other company puts in their EULA if it's illegal to begin with -- and disclaiming all responsibilities for their products' working or not may very well be illegal in your state or country. But no one has had the clout to go up against Microsoft in court over any of that for now. If they keep up their slow slide downhill like this, they'll find themselves being challenged in court over things they used to get away with all the time. That's what happened to IBM, remember? If not, go do some research on IBM's former market dominance and subsequent fall.

My Question

[RAMMS EIN]

I haven't really seen a lot of Vista that impressed me enough that I remember it now...but I have one question. What the heck _were_ they thinking when they made that Expose knock-off (I don't know what it's called) that puts the windows _behind_ one another?! I mean, the whole point of Expose is that it arranges windows so that they _don't_ overlap, so you can see everything at once.

Re:My Question

[UltimApe]

I believe that was actually a knock off of some paradigm that sun was doing with their desktop. I don't know the name, but you could write notes on the back of windows and fancy stuff like that.

Re:My Question

[cp.tar]

Never tried Vista, but that sounds rather like the ancient Windows "Cascade windows" feature.

I always hated it.

Re:My Question

[taskforce]

Looking Glass

[URL]http://www.sun.com/software/looking_glass/[/U RL] It really is rather impressive. This project has really had quite a bit of influence on this current generation of Operating Systems; If you look at Apple's Dashboard, the whole "flip the window over for the settings panel" originated there. I am a supporter of developers "copying" or "ripping off" features from other OSes as long as it leads to a better user experience, so I think it's all fine myself.

Re:My Question

[johneee]

If you dig around the site, you'll find this answer from one of their usability people:

Expose actually does not have great usability results. The primary problem is that the position that the windows are placed in is not predictable. Users have to search the desktop to see where Expose decided to place the app they are looking for. Many Mac users continue to rely on the Dock and Apple-TAB to switch tasks. Flip 3D keeps the windows in their front to back order and aligns them on a known curve. Most users who know about Flip 3D use it as their primary task switching mechanism.

(More of his answer is here: http://shellrevealed.com/forums/thread/602.aspx )

So apparently it's based on (who'da thunk it) research. It might be flawed research of course, but they did what they did conciously...

From my own limited playing with Flip3D I can actually see what's on the screens... Not all of them, but enough to see what's going on.

Re:My Question

[RAMMS EIN]

``Expose actually does not have great usability results. The primary problem is that the position that the windows are placed in is not predictable. Users have to search the desktop to see where Expose decided to place the app they are looking for.''

This is partially correct, and it's why I am not very excited about expose. I use ratpoison, which, for me, is very predictable: my terminal is on Ctl-t 0, my browser on Ctl-t 1, etc.

However, Expose is not really _that_ unpredictable. You see the windows move to their new positions. As soon as you spot the one you want, you can select it. Even if you wait until all of them are in their final positions, all you will have to do is find the one you want in a 2D search space. With Flip 3D (thanks for reminding me of the name), you have to recognize the window based on the small part of it that is not obscured. I can't see how that is better. But, of course, I didn't do the research. And what the heck do I know; I'm a command line junkie.

Re:My Question

[drsmithy]

(More of his answer is here: http://shellrevealed.com/forums/thread/602.aspx )

Personally I found this part far more interesting:

Also, Expose becomes less useful as the number of Windows increases. This is more of an issue in Windows than the mac because in general users have more applications open on a Windows machine than a Mac.

This mirrors my experiences between Windows and OS X (and I use both regularly). I typically have *far* more applications/windows running/open on Windows than I do in OS X. Much of this has to do with OS X's overall GUI sluggishness and relatively poor multitasking (which isn't especially good to start with and degrades rapidly as load increases), but it's equally because of the awful models for switching between apps/windows. Expose certainly improved the situation immensely, but it still becomes unusable due to clutter with large numbers of windows.

random response

[smcdow]

Have you ever wanted to ask the people behind the Vista UI exactly what they were thinking when they did things like Flip 3D or the windows that turn black when maximized?

No.

Interviews

[bobsledbob]

This should go under the "Interviews" section...

"We'll send the top 10 highest moderated questions directly to their blog."

Excessive Requirements

[HermMunster]

Why can my video card play most of the best games and some of the latest just fine but it isn't adequate for the Vista Aero Interface? What is Microsoft doing to ensure that cards such as the gforce4 ti cards which are 128mb of ram run the AERO interface being that nVidia doesn't provide modern drivers any more? Why is the interface the main selling point behind Vista (along with alleged security that has no promise from Microsoft actually about security) the Aero interface? How can this OS be anything more than just a pig with lipstick? Why try to pull the wool over everyone's eyes with security most commonly found in most other OSes with the AERO interface where the requirements are far too high? How come it seems the programmers don't seem to be writing optimized code to reduce the requirements? Why can't we be allowed for force the AERO interface on and live with the performance issues to our own detriment, if we so choose? Why can't we adjust features to allow us to run portions of the interface?

Vista is just XP with a new interface and security that could have been added to XP with a service pack. Why was XP not good enough? If it is security, what are you going to do for the next two years for XP users? What are you going to do, get the Department of Homeland Security to warn the American public to buy and upgrade to Vista?

Re:Excessive Requirements

[Anonymous Coward]

"What are you going to do, get the Department of Homeland Security to warn the American public to buy and upgrade to Vista?"

Yes, and if you don't, you're a terrorist. Baby killer! You only have Windows 98 on your machine! Think of the children!

Re:Excessive Requirements

[chmod a x mojo]

Actually i would bet on say 3-4 days from the final release of vista that there will be someone posting a way to force aero on on "insufficient" hardware. probably just a registry hack / .dll unregistering....

Re:Excessive Requirements

[tcc3]

What are you talking about? I have two Geforce4 ti cards and both are running the latest Nvidia unified driver. How do you mean, no modern drivers? They are a web-download away.

Re:Excessive Requirements

[SEMW]

Sorry, you're talking rubbish. Vista's not even based on XP; it's based on a redesigned Server 2003 kernel. Let's see... Completely new memory management, new window manager, new user account model, new sound stack, new graphics stack, new networking stack, new resource-protected driver model... Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windo ws_Vista for all of them.

>Why was XP not good enough? I wish you trolls would make up your minds. Either XP is an abomination to humanity and the worst OS you could choose or it's so perfect that there's nothing Vista could possibly do to improve it. Right...

A 1990s answer...

[dpbsmith]

...I have no idea what goes on at Microsoft in 2006 but let me tell you what went on circa 1990 at a (now-defunct) Fortune 500 minicomputer company, in the days of so-called "CHUI" interfaces (GUI-like interfaces implemented via line-drawing and X-Y character addressing on 80x24 green-screen terminals). I think I've told this story before on Slashdot, so apologies if you've heard it.

A developer was proudly showing off his spiffy new application. I started playing with it, and discovered that there were _three consecutive screens_ each containing the same field, into which the user was required to type the same entry, manually, three consecutive times. And there were no "copy" or "paste" functions. You actually needed to type your phone number or your SSN whatever it was three times in a row.

When I asked about this, he pulled a 150-page functional spec out of a drawer and showed me that he had implemented that the spec called for. It had slipped by. It's not that easy to previsualize how a UI will work based on a paper description.

When I suggested he change it, he said "No way. It took nine months to get that spec approved. Any change would require a review cycle and several meetings to get it approved. And if I change it without getting the spec changed, it won't pass SQA. This project is already behind schedule. I'm implementing it exactly the way this piece of paper says."

Another source of UI weirdness at another company I worked at was a CEO who fancied himself a UI expert. Or at least felt entitled to have the UI tailored to his personal tastes. He was always dictating changes in details of UIs. Unfortunately, he sometimes didn't previsualize how that change would interact with other details, and if you wanted to ask him "Say, now that we've done this thing here hadn't we better change this other thing there so that thus-and-such-bad thing won't happen," his secretary would schedule the appointment for a date a couple weeks from today.

I don't say this is how incomprehensibly strange UI happens at Microsoft. I say these are two ways in which it can happen.

Re:A 1990s answer...

[Savage-Rabbit]

I don't say this is how incomprehensibly strange UI happens at Microsoft. I say these are two ways in which it can happen.

UI idiocy happens in more places than Microsoft's development division. Take for example one of the iterations of the Red Hat setup utility which had this nifty window requiring you to fill out a large form. Unfortunately you needed information from the previous window to complete the form and there was no [ < Back ] button so you had to write it down before proceeding since you couldn't take a screenshot or even print the screen to an ink-jet printer. They fixed it a few minor distro versions later. Until then many was the time you cursed the developers as you restarted the installation process after forgetting about this pitfall and hitting the [ Next > ] button to soon. Examples of UIs in Linux are numerous. Another example of an annoyingly silly UI is the OS.X Finder application......

Re:A 1990s answer...

[Anonymous Coward]

Another source of UI weirdness at another company I worked at was a CEO who fancied himself a UI expert. Or at least felt entitled to have the UI tailored to his personal tastes. He was always dictating changes in details of UIs.

You worked for Steve Jobs? :D

Re:A 1990s answer...

[Angostura]

The developer was at least partially correct in his attitude. I suspect he had been ground down by the organisation and was now watching his back. He was right not to change the spec unilaterally. He was wrong not to point out to the spec-meisters as soon as he spotted it that the spec was probably wrong, and that it should be amended. He should also have pointed out in writing that if the spec was not amended and approved within a day there would be a developmental delay.

Out of topic but hey

[Poltras]

Wait a minute... Who are you?!? only 50 comments (25 being in the last month and a half) and a 4-digit number?!? And you just come here and post a "let's not be carried away"..? Uh?!?

Re:Out of topic but hey

[Phantom of the Opera]

I got sick of the "FIRST POST" meme from a while back. Then my user name got truncated from 'Phantom of the Operating System' to 'Phanom of the Opera' so I had thought my account was deleted. On a whim a year ago, I tried 'Phantom of the Opera' and viola; I am back.

Re:Out of topic but hey

[Atlantis-Rising]

If true that is amazingly funny and ironic. Phantom of the Operating SYstem to Phantom of The Opera? Lucky you!

About the picture...

[cp.tar]

OK, so I haven't read TFA.

But take a look at the pic... both the Before and the After... now, why, oh why the two buttons?
Call them join and Rename, call them Network ID and Change, however you put it, you'd get a cleaner interface with just one button.

Or am I missing something?

Re:About the picture...

[SoapDish]

For the record I agree with you. There shouldn't be two buttons.

However, If you look at the before picture, "Network ID" will bring you to a wizard. The other button should bring you to a proper networking config.

Now, in the after picture, by making it more "user friendly", I have no idea what those buttons are supposed to do. I assume they perform the same function as before.

I hate wizards, and Windows's obsession with them. They always come up when you don't want them to often screwing up stuff that already worked.

Re:About the picture...

[cp.tar]

However, If you look at the before picture, "Network ID" will bring you to a wizard. The other button should bring you to a proper networking config.

Keyword: should.

I really don't know what it does nor do I care anymore.

And I'll agree with you about the wizards... I swear, sometimes I think they're more annoying than Clippy.

Re:About the picture...

[malakai]

You only see two buttons if you are currently a member of a domain. In workgroup mode (which 99% of home users would use) you just see a single button. And in the case of Server 2003,that single button simply says:

To rename this computer or join a domain, click Change.

There should be lower hanging fruit for them to pick from this tree.

As Trojan's for DRM go

[macz]

Vista sure is pretty.

The site is indicative

[Dracos]

First off, when I (and many other /.ers) think shell, we think command line. This site obviously isn't about Monad (or even DOS). Windows doesn't have anything that resembles a typical shell. Call it desktoprevealed.com or something.

Then I go there, and get greeted with a masthead image that fills 2/3 of my window. I don't want to see a picture of where they smoke their crack. That and the light text on dark backgrounds design (harder to read) exemplifies the UI team's (subconscious?) philosophy: screw the user, we'll make them do things our way. I'm certain that AeroGlass will be the default visual style, so Vista's reason for existence ("ooh, shiny") will be obvious to all.

When MS finally realizes that all design (phisical or virtual) must adhere to "form follows function", rather than "function follows form", "function follows corporate strategy", or "form follows corporate strategy" then they will produce a natural, usable interface. They also need to get their act together with regard to consistency. Apple knows how to do these things. Even Gnome and KDE have picked up on them.

As long as the face that Windows presents to the user is guided by marketshare maintenance and implemented haphazardly, people will complain, no matter how shiny and transparent and whiz-bang visual effects they pile up on it. MS has to spout "it'll be easier for the user" on random topics because they make other random topics confusing on purpose.

Re:The site is indicative

[ben there...]

When MS finally realizes that all design (phisical or virtual) must adhere to "form follows function", rather than "function follows form", "function follows corporate strategy", or "form follows corporate strategy" then they will produce a natural, usable interface.

You should really be talking to Apple about that. They have excellent UI simplicity, but there are so many times when I just wish they'd show me what is going on, a progress bar or two here and there. Or being able to right-click at almost all times to get handy shortcuts. Or not having to click inside a window first before my clicks start doing anything with that app.

Apple is much more "function follows form". MS is more "form follows function", even if that means making everything all ugly.

Re:The site is indicative

[Anonymous Coward]

"That and the light text on dark backgrounds design (harder to read) exemplifies the UI team's (subconscious?) philosophy: screw the user, we'll make them do things our way."

If Light text on a dark background is hard to read then many cars, and movies (for years) have been making it hard to read things.

I have always changed the layout of the UI to have a dark background and lighter text to make it easier to read. Then again I have a perscription to get the windshield tinted in my car too. Yes, I get pulled over by almost every cop in every town I go in because of it (having my windshield tinted).

Re:The site is indicative

[drsmithy]

Apple knows how to do these things.

You have *got* to be kidding. Half the UI elements in OS X are there primarily because they look cool and not because they exhibit good usability. The Dock is, of course, the most notable example, but there are plenty of others.

Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[master_p]

Dear Win32 developers, why is your API so ugly?

Here is a short temp list of problems:

1) why did you force an object-oriented system on your window system? why each window has to be an object? why didn't you separate the windowing system from the widgets library? the OO system you have adds an additional overhead for languages that want to have their own OO system.

2) why only one message queue? why not multiple message queues? why each windows message can not have an arbitrary amount of data?

3) why do I have to register a windows class? the API could have been much simpler if I simply passed a set of attributes in the creation routine.

4) why the return value of WindowProc is so strange? sometimes the valid return value is 0, sometimes it is 1.

5) why the function GetMessage returns a BOOL which actually has 3 values (TRUE, FALSE and -1)?

6) why your widgets are not autosizing? I have to manually resize each widget when its content changes (for example text or font). Why there isn't geometry negotiation as in MOTIF?

7) why every window has to have a frame? why didn't you separated window frames from windows? all the messages like WM_PAINT, etc are duplicated as WM_NCPAINT etc.

8) why didn't you use a property system for windows and you had to use the problematic 'set values' interface?

9) why the text resources of a GUI app can not be changed on the fly? why text is not a separate file?

There is no doubt that the Windows Shell is and has always been eye-catching...but to program it, one needs to use an API on top of it that abstracts its ugly details. And don't tell me it is because system-level programming of GUIs is difficult, because there are many window systems around that prove you wrong.

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[Rezonant]

The simple answer is that the base windowing system of Win32 was designed in the 80's for very weak computers, and it simply can't be changed. They HAD to keep it lean and mean. Of course, there was obviously some lack of forethought involved, but hindsight is 20/20...

Instead, they've now developed Avalon / WPF, which contains most of the missing features you are listing there, and a lot more than that. Yeah they should have done this sooner, but hey, it's Microsoft...

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh?

-Win32 Programmer (for past 13 years)

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[MikeBabcock]

I'll note the parent posted as AC -- I wouldn't admit that I didn't know what the GP was talking about. I've been writing Windows code in various languages since Windows 3.0 and Borland C++ and I know exactly what he's complaining about. I've got a few dozen more myself (including the terrible async networking classes in MFC42).

Ever wondered why IE corrupted large downloads? You try writing good software with those classes.

Microsoft has often been quoted as saying internally that the Windows API is their most valuable product. Making a platform for others to write Windows API based software on was one of their primary concerns. To be honest, some of what Microsoft did was really nice ... the common TAPI and MAPI interfaces are ugly, but useful for example.

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[TomorrowPlusX]

he simple answer is that the base windowing system of Win32 was designed in the 80's for very weak computers

That's certainly true, and you see the same malarky when you look at Mac OS Classic code -- except that it's even hackier there, if you can believe that. But that said, ObjectiveC and Cocoa were designed back in the 80's, too, and they're quite pleasant to work with. I have to assume, of course, that Cocoa's evolved quite a bit, but the principles of how those apps work are essentially the same as they were 15 years ago. Cocoa's a robust API, and it's aged nicely.

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[shadow169]

I'm no expert, I've only been doing Win32 programming for about 5 years now, but I just would love some clarification to your questions. I'm assuming you are referring to the strait Win32 API, not MFC.

why did you force an object-oriented system on your window system? why each window has to be an object?

Again, do you mean MFC here or the strait Win32 API. If you mean the strait Win32 API how else would you build a windowing system where each window was not naturally an object. What better way do you have in mind?

why didn't you separate the windowing system from the widgets library?

So some of the first basic control types are part of user32.dll. I'm not saying this is perfect but in concept they are still a layer above the windowing system itself, unless there is something I'm missing.

the OO system you have adds an additional overhead for languages that want to have their own OO system.

I as well as several others are obviously missing something here. You make an accusation, then give no examples.

why only one message queue? why not multiple message queues?

How is more than one message que per thread advantageous. What would the thread do, switch back and forth between the ques? The thread can only service one que at a time.

why each windows message can not have an arbitrary amount of data?

Simple answer here is that they can. Each windows message contains two 32bit values that can contain anything, including a pointer to a data structure that can contain any amount of data you wish.

why didn't you use a property system for windows and you had to use the problematic 'set values' interface?

Again, are you referring to MFC or the strait Win32 API? If you are referring to the API I really don't understand what you are talking about. This almost makes me think you are referring to Visual Basic and properties on objects. Obviously for as much compatibility as possible all "values" in windows would be "set" by sending it a message.

why the text resources of a GUI app can not be changed on the fly? why text is not a separate file?

Actually you can do this. I'll admit it isn't the easiest thing. You create separate resource only DLLs for your application and load and unload them dynamically.

As far as all your other comments I either agree completely or will say it's due to legacy support.

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[Jugalator]

Some good questions in there, but you posted them in the wrong forum!

Try theirs instead and you're much more likely to receive a reply, but maybe you aren't interested in that?

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly?

[drsmithy]

But that said, ObjectiveC and Cocoa were designed back in the 80's, too, and they're quite pleasant to work with. I have to assume, of course, that Cocoa's evolved quite a bit, but the principles of how those apps work are essentially the same as they were 15 years ago. Cocoa's a robust API, and it's aged nicely.

Yes, but I think you'll find all the stuff that went into NeXT was done with the 20/20 hindsight that was gained from MacOS Classic.

Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does Vista require you to buy a new PC? Why does Vista cost so much? Why is Vista's ship date continually delayed? Why have widely touted features been stripped away? Why did Microsoft give so much money to Republicans whose Department of Justice dropped the case against Microsoft after receiving the money? You know, there are some questions Microsoft should answer. I just do not think Microsoft is going to answer these questions.

Time Better Spent?

[multiOSfreak]

Shouldn't these guys/gals be spending their time, uh, finishing up with the code rather than blogging? I mean it's not like Vista is ahead of schedule or anything.

When I run it, just MAKE IT WORK!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sorry, I am not giving over my valuable time and commentary freely just to fatten the profits of any global megacorp..."

Come back, Pandrijeczko! We miss you already! Seriously what makes you think you're going to be missed? Let alone be running Vista.

BTW Your complaint is a red herring. Vista isn't for sale yet (and is freely downloadable). No one has promised you anything. They're asking for input and you're excluding yourself from the process. Seems like you don't have any room to complain when it goes on sale.

Blogging platform

[omega9]

You know, the Sharepoint team has been blogging for quite some time, and they've got a product that quite usable. Hell, why not use their own blogs.msdn.com? And when it comes down to it, why not use one of the millions of free blogging services or apps already available?

Instead they're running off Community Server. Just look at their prices.

I'm just saying it's interesting that they've got in-house products they're not using, there are free services they're not using, and there are free packages they could run that they're not using. Instead they go for a most-likely limited commercial something.

Re:Blogging platform

[Anonymous Coward]

blogs.msdn.com and blogs.technet.com run off Community Server too...

Why?

[rajafarian]

Why keep that "feature" in there (espeically when talking about a GUI) when it doesn't work as adertised?

Because you advertise that the feature works and the more features you advertise that they work the more lemmings you can get to buy your product. Then you try to eliminate competition so that when the lemmings realize that the feaure works like crap, or doesn't work at all, they don't have a choice but to continue using your crappy product. At least with Linux, the programmers actually want to fix faulty features! :)

In short, Microsft should be known as a marketing, and not technology, company. I wonder if Microsoft's billions in research includes marketing research... "Who should we buy today?" "Where should we spread our FUD today?"

I'm a firm believer that most people act in the best intrests of others.

Dude, evidence shows that to NOT be the case, IMO. But please continue to think positively of others!

Vista - On a clear day you can see forever

[Stanistani]

Enough obscure Steisand references...

Could Microsoft finally be edging towards a more open-to-the-customer development process?

I'll be interested to see if any suggested actions make it into a service pack.

Back in the day, if you could chat or email a Microsoft coder, they would respond to cogent suggestions...

I know precisely what they were thinking, simply

[Anonymous Coward]

MacOS X
MacOS X
MacOS X
MacOS X
MacOS X
MacOS X

UI as important as stability and security???

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't believe when I read that...

"Some folks I talk to say that the UI is just as important as performance and system stability. Others say performance, stability and security come first.

For me - the UI is just as important as performance, stability, security and everything else."

http://shellrevealed.com/blogs/externalnews/archiv e/2006/09/19/So-just-how-important-is-the-UI_3F00_ .aspx

http://www.mstechtoday.com/2006/09/18/so-just-how- important-is-the-ui/

That explains *many* things.

Re:UI as important as stability and security???

[Anonymous Coward]

I preffer my operating system to be stable, secure and beautiful:

http://art.gnome.org/screenshots/gnome215

Re:UI as important as stability and security???

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't believe when I read that...
"Some folks I talk to say that the UI is just as important as performance and system stability. Others say performance, stability and security come first.
For me - the UI is just as important as performance, stability, security and everything else."

It's not actually that shocking. UI and security, for example, aren't independent (and I'm sure with a little thought everybody can come up with an example). Performance and stability and UI aren't independent, either.

He was a bit sloppy with his language, maybe, but you *expect* UI developers to care more about the UI than anything else. He could just be emphasizing that the UI is job #1 for him. That's good.

Apple ships pretty secure systems, but I doubt if you surveyed all the folks at Apple they'd tell you "oh, security is most important!". It isn't, to them. They care about *their* piece of it most of all. That's not to say they don't know security or don't care about it -- just that it's not job #1 for everybody all the time. (I can think of lots of things that developers have to keep in mind. You can't have 8 things that are all job #1.)

Microsoft isn't Apple, and maybe they're doing a crummy job at this, or maybe they're letting UI guys write security-critical code, or something else dumb. But having UI guys who care most about UI is not a crime.

What are you smoking?

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows wasn't 32-bit until Win95

Re:What are you smoking?

[TheRaven64]

Windows was first 32-bit with Windows NT 3.1, released in July 1993. Not quite the '80s, but not far off. This was just after the release of the initial Pentium, with the majority of machines still being 486s. To encourage people to port applications to NT, Microsoft made the Win32 API as similar to the Win16 API as they could (in many cases it is a direct superset). Since the Win16 API dates back to very early versions of Windows, the Win32 API can be regarded as coming from the '80s.

Hmm

[Drakin020]

I have a feeling that the writer of this artical isvery biased.

Headline is wrong... again...

[qzulla]

From TFA:

shell:revealed isn't about Windows Vista, it's about Windows. Many of the people on the Windows Client team have been here a very long time and have plenty of knowledge to share with the world. This is the place to find out what we're doing, how we're doing it, and why. This site is dedicated to all Windows users.

I realize that is probably where their efforts are but it is not dedicated to Vista as the headline states.

qz

Monad blog is here

[I'm Don Giovanni]

Here is the location of the Monad (Windows Power Shell) blog:
http://blogs.msdn.com/powershell/default.aspx

To the parent, MS spends a lot on usability testing; geeks and programmers are the LAST ones I'd ask to comment on UI. I'll take real world testing over what programmers/geeks have to say about UI, thanks.

The team has something to show.

[Tei]

I am much more a Ubuntu guy, but I have checked some MSDN pages about the Dont's and Do about the new UI shell.

Imho, the new shell changes adds tons of stuff new. Is a jump bigger than 2000 to XP for good. Because this people are tryiing to remove the ilogic from the dialogs, and creating tools so the applications become easyer to use, even for newbies.

Seems that maybe the core will not be a huge change for Vista, but the Shell will be a revolution. A good one. I am happy about that because I become bored withouth refreshing stuff on the computing scene :D

CONGRATULATIONS MICROSOFT!!

And, while I am at it. Can somehome at Microsoft send me a working CD-KEY for XP Pro? this dawn FCKW key.. my email is oscar.vives@gmail.com

Interestingly enough this domain belongs to

[ubersonic]

Registrant:
    Rob Howard
    17950 Preston Rd
    Ste 310
    Dallas, Texas 75252
    United States

    Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
    Domain Name: SHELLREVEALED.COM
      Created on: 03-May-06
      Expires on: 03-May-07
      Last Updated on: 08-Sep-06

    Administrative Contact:
      Howard, Rob Whois Privacy and Spam Prevention by Whois Source
      17950 Preston Rd
      Ste 310
      Dallas, Texas 75252
      United States
      (972) 407-0688

    Technical Contact:
      Howard, Rob Whois Privacy and Spam Prevention by Whois Source
      17950 Preston Rd
      Ste 310
      Dallas, Texas 75252
      United States
      (972) 407-0688

Re:Interestingly enough this domain belongs to

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, I'll bite... interesting, why?

FLAME & SHAME

[MickDownUnder]

This whole discussion on this article is absolutely appalling, I've not read one modded up comment in which the author seemed like he had a clue about the subject matter in the article.

It's always been the case on here that technical articles about Microsoft ccontain quite a bit of offtopic general slagging of Microsoft, however there's usually one or two comments modded up that genuinely shed some intelligent light on the topic, this is probably the worst discussion I've seen on here. Why are moderators modding up offtopic crap !?

I'm actually genuinely interested in this topic and came to read the comments hoping someone might have some further insight or information on the subject. This seems to be getting worse, it seems slashdot is just not the place to find such information.

Perhaps it would be better for slashdot to stop posting articles such as these relating to MS technology with no apparent Open Source or Linux spin. I mean this just makes Slashdot look bad.

Apple's Statement zu Windows Vista

[vdboor]

"But underneath.. it's still windows"

Blogging isn't necessarily a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a consultant who came into work a bit ago and he mentioned that of the fortune 500 companies, the ones who are losing money and the ones who are in general poor performers, 80% of them are starting to blog to generate buzz about themselves. And the companies that are doing well aren't bothering to blog.

You see, MS knows that Vista is a piece of crap- hence the blogging.

OMG I am not alone!!!

[Anomalyst]

Every distribution should have a check box for "vanilla16" or at least "vanilla256" that turns off ALL the silly GUI animation, color gradiations, etc and is repected by all the applications. I don't need 40bit color space and spinning logos to write an email or code a script.

No, they cant

[Anonymous Coward]

My friend has a PowerMac G3, and the only way he could get it to run OSX was to stuff it with as much ram as possible, and run it at 640x480 resolution (pure crap). It lags with more than one decently sized app running (he cant run StarEdit (through classic) and Safari at the same time without lag).

Re:No, they cant

[Steve Cowan]

Of course there will be lag. The Power Mac G3 topped out at what, 450 MHz? 500 MHz? The original poster's point is that it runs and works. Aero's requirements are double of what OS X needs.

No thanks

[Opportunist]

I already skip ads when watching movies. Why would I now deliberately go out of my way to watch one?

it might be a stupid name

[Phantom of the Opera]

but I'm keeping it. To hell with good sense.

I think I know why

[Monsuco]

Microsoft is intending to make Vista an impulse purchase. They are banking on people seeing it run on new high end PCs and thinking "that looks better than what I have" and buying an upgrade. They hope people don't notice until they buy it that it provides crappy performance on their old high end graphics chip. MS needs to learn from Apples mistakes, pretty doesn't sell. The Mac GUI is prettier than XP, but it tends to do obnoxious things with eye candy and people like the familiar windows feel. Perhaps linux has learned from this, as most of their desktop environments like KDE and Gnome do plenty well on resonable hardware, and you have Xgl and Looking Glass for those that just want eye candy.

My Internal Struggle-with sex.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Actually- I never have! I've stayed as FAR away from it as possible, based on other's reactions..."

Alright! Nobody frown while having sex. TrippTDF's future depends on it.

FLAME & SHAME-and a detour.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, to be fair. It's not an article. It's basically saying "go see this new site". NOW the fact that there's little intelligent discussion on the content of that site is typical slashdot.

Don't blog, CODE

[Gothmolly]

Stop blogging, listening to your iPods, and buzzing over 'Web 2.0'. CODE THE FARKING SHELL TO BE USEFUL. What do we pay you for?

No pressure here

[DescentToCocytus]

...before it is foisted on you and the rest of the world

That's strange, I certainly don't feel as if I am being coerced into buying Vista when it is released. Last time I checked, business in this country was still conducted on an "at will" basis. Windows XP does everything I want it to do, and has been fully stable since SP1. The release of a new version does not automatically render all previous versions useless. XP will continue to be a viable option for at least three more years, by which time the majority of bugs will be ironed out of Vista.

Keep on grasping at threads Apple fanboys, maybe one day you'll actually come up with a criticism of Microsoft that holds water.

Yadda yadda

[CxDoo]

Monad is one of few really interesting & innovative bits in Vista so please, stop bashing it.

XP

[oohshiny]

When I suggested he change it, he said "No way. It took nine months to get that spec approved. Any change would require a review cycle and several meetings to get it approved. And if I change it without getting the spec changed, it won't pass SQA. This project is already behind schedule. I'm implementing it exactly the way this piece of paper says."

Discovering that the requirements you wrote don't work the way you intended is very common, and it's what Extreme Programming is supposed to fix...