Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Leaked
Slatterz writes "Screenshots of what is said to be the next version of Microsoft's Windows operating system have been leaked onto the internet. The ThinkNext.net blog posted a range of screenshots over the weekend which it said represents Windows 7. Overall, the screenshots show a distinctly Vista-like interface, but there is still plenty of time for tweaks and changes to take place."
Slashdot is not the place for hot news. Slashdot is a community forum dedicated to discussions regarding "news for nerds." The point of Slashdot is not to present you with news but to allow you and other nerds to debate yesterday's news.
Everyone knows 'Leak' is Public-Relations-Speak for 'Released'. Now if someone uploaded Windows 7, *THAT* would be a leak. But for anything else than that, why can't we call it what it is?
No one said "leaked" in the original blog where the screenshots are. This came from reposts on other blogs and from the Slashdot summary. So if it's "PR" speak, I guess Slashdot's doing the PR work for Microsoft here.
If you want a piece of real news for Windows 7, let me "leak" two your way:
1) Windows 7 will unbundle many bundled apps it used to come with, such as Windows Mail, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker. They will be now offered separately as free downloads on live.com. This means if you use Thunderbird, you never have to install Windows Mail (former Outlook Express) anymore.
2) Windows 2008 and Vista SP1 were based on the same exact source code, packaged with different modules and configuration. Windows 7 will continue this approach, as it will share the exact same source with Windows 2008 R2.
I think the parent was trying to make a joke. The joke was that they were videos but the operating system was going so slow that they only seemed like screenshots.
I realise you're taking the piss, but...
Not new to Windows. I'm pretty sure you've been able to do this since Windows 98.
Have you considered that 512Meg is sufficient for his needs? I also have 512Meg systems running Ubuntu and they're snappy and work well. Heck, my wifes computer (WinXP) has 2Gig and it rarely uses more than 620Meg or so.... That's with both of us logged in.
512Meg for a normal desktop doing a bit surfing email, word processing, spreadsheet and similar "light" task is sufficient. (Clue in the 640k is enough for anyone commenters)
For him, the choice might be between "spending money on something he doesn't really need" and "not spending money at all".
I know that it's possible in XP because I checked before posting. Unlock the taskbar, and drag the toolbars around the screen. It's not quite as flexible as in Ubuntu, as the start button, clock, notification area and application 'tabs' all have to be on the same bar. But stuff like quick launch, search field... basically anything in the 'Toolbars' menu can be dragged to different parts of the screen.
I think you've been able to do that since 98, as that was when the quick launch bar was introduced. If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected :)
Having worked on the Win7 team, I'd say Vista to Win7 felt more like the difference between 2000 and XP. There are a couple new big features (Win7 has multitouch support, BitLocker has been dramatically improved, etc.), a variety of UI tweaks and tricks (the new theme picker, the modified system tray, and more of that sort), and some mostly-behind-the-scenes changes (faster bootup and hibernation on multicore machines, UAC by default now elevates without prompting for Microsoft-signed executables, and a few others).
It *is* an improvement, but could arguably be described as a refined and matured version of Vista, with a couple new features. It's a bigger change, especially from the user perspective, than XP RTM to XP SP2, but much smaller than XP SP2 to Vista.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
1. Windows 1
2. Windows 2
3. Windows 3 / 3.10 / 3.11
4. Windows 95
4.1 Windows 98
4.9 Windows ME
Windows NT (Started at 3 to be on parity with regular windows at the time)
3. NT 3.1 / 3.5 /3.51
4. NT 4
5. Windows 2000
5.1 Windows XP
5.2 Windows XP 64 / Server Edition
6. Windows Vista
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Yes. For example, when MS bought Hotmail and changed the servers from FreeBSD to Windows, they used SFU (including ssh and rsync) to do the remote administration. There was a leaked MS memo discussing this, it was on Slashdot back in the day. Here, in fact.
You mean that if somebody can figure out how to forge a microsoft signature or infect a signed file they can get carte blance access to your machine.
Spoken like someone who has absolutely no concept on how certificates and signing works.
Read up on certificates and signing code, then come back and say you're sorry.
I hate the new control panel. Silly small little inconsistencies add up:
Before, to change your window theme you could either access it by right clicking on your desktop and going to preferences. Or you could go into your display properties in the control panel. This was a little easier to do for me, because I can reach it with keyboard commands.
I went to turn off Aero in Vista (and thus, free up 500mb of memory). I couldn't find it. I looked all over in control panel. It wasn't there. They removed a lot of the 'basic' desktop preferences away completely from the control panel. Um, hello?
Little inconsistencies like this - where you can access PARTS of your display properties from one thing, and other parts from elsewhere - but not both from the same place. It's pure lunacy. And it's rife throughout the OS.