Who the hell keeps posting this garbage? I thought Peter Guttman's paper was thoroughly debunked. But we still have some ignorant karmawhoring people who like to chant "DRM DRM DRM".
Microsoft will release a public beta this week of its next desktop operating system, Windows 7, hoping it will address the problems that have made Windows Vista perhaps the least popular OS in its history.
So, Vista failed because they didn't provide a public beta for it?
How about addressing the increasingly long list of features people actually want instead of a resource intensive API to make my windows translucent?
Or, making what was arguably Vista's best and at the same time worst feature (UAC) something that works without making itself so intrusive as to be the first time users desire to disable?!
No, it does not mean that. The "it" refers to the preceding noun "Windows 7", not the "public beta". There are already lots of fixes to the UAC which make it very less annoying. But looks like people like you are not bothered to actually find out, but just post some anti-MS tripe so that it gets modded up.
That is true of casual and personal piracy. Not full scale commercial piracy, because the pirates actually charge people for the software. They don't give it away.
What nonsense? Those pirates were making millions of dollars by illegally selling code developed by Microsoft at great expense. It's not as if MS is suing individual users like the RIAA does. It doesn't make any sense think they will go after anyone who "pirates" Windows 7 beta.
FTA:
In theory this is bad news for Microsoft: it would represent mass piracy and lost revenue.
Huh? A beta copy of Windows 7 represents mass piracy and lost revenue? The beta expires in July anyway, even if it's production quality. I guess any tripe will get posted on Slashdot if it's anti-Microsoft.
I don't know why is this marked as a troll. Both XP home and XP pro share the exact same code base, except that Home doesn't have stuff like IIS, Remote desktop server, etc.
Uhmm, the kicker is, I'm *STILL* running Win2k. And not only that, but I've got drivers from within the last year running on it for both my PCIe Radeon HD3650, and my Logitech Driving Force Pro. Nevermind that Realtek supports most of their chipset hardware all the way back to either Win9x or DOS, depending.
And the kicker of all this? Basically any game that doesn't require Windows Live and/or have a hardcoded check for XP will run and play fine on it.
WinXP for all intents and purposes was a rebadge of 2k with some additional eyecandy and a FEW interface changes. But the majority of said interface changes don't affect 90 percent of the applications out there.
Forced obsolescence is fine if there's a reason, but if your 10 year old OS has everything that a modern app needs to support it, there's no reason to upgrade. (Nevermind that 2k is the last windows version without that annoying Windows Activation stuff, and in fact is the reason I spent 300 bucks on it well after WinXP was out.)
Keep telling yourself that. But there are actually a lot of enhancements . And no, those are not UI enhancements(which there are a ton, like wireless stuff in xp sp2). Those are just kernel enhancements.
The problem exists because, if a user can install FireFox(or any other software) off the internet, they can install malware disguised as a useful program too. Windows, or any other OS or browser, cannot determine whether a said program is harmful(except Antivirus s/w like Defender). IE now gives multiple warnings and stops driveby downloads by default(pops up a bar on top) and allows downloads onyl if you click on a direct link etc. If OS X/Linux was popular and a legitimate looking site offered NiceGame.deb or NiceGame.dmg, won't many users(naive ones) download and install them beyond any warnings etc.? Either you make stuff absurdly hard to install(hence making FireFox hard to install), or use a whitelist like iPhone App Store(which stops all other sites from distributing s/w), ideas which won't be popular at all.
That's not an option for MS, like for Apple, because there's a whole fuckton of Win32 applications and once those don't run well, everyone(including Slashdot) will be all over their ass for not being fully backward compatible.
WTF? Who keeps writing this drivel and who keeps modding this up just because it sounds right and is anti-MS? I have been using Vista 64-bit since more than a year and it does have a 32 bit subsystem.
You made the claim, sir, you get to back it up. You list a lot of presentations, none of which (by their titles) actually list improvements in Windows 7 over XP. Some titles, in fact, sound like they're an excuse to duplicate the errors of Vista, such as:
The next generation user experience for presenting commands in Win32 applications.
If that doesn't sound like an excuse to re-arrange and proprietize things to break backwards compatibility and help cut off XP users, I don't know what does.
I didn't make the claim. Learn to read and comprehend.
Do you watch movies by reading the titles and watch entire multiple tv programs from the onscreen guide itself? And you're criticizing Windows 7 based on a title of a video? Wow, looks like you're already bent upon putting fingers in your ears and shouting 'la la la'. And you thanked the other poster for googling for you and giving you the first linke? Ignorance is not an excuse.
How hard is it to google or Wikipedia? I know it's easier asking others to spoonfeed them and counter them if they don't.
Here are some videos if you're really interested.
How hard is it to open a terminal window (or use a Gnome applet which puts a terminal line on your taskbar) and type "sudo system-config-display" or whatever you need to run as root?
How hard is it to click a button when the UAC UI pops up? Still we have a lot of bitching about it going on. Users, especially non-power users, don't like anything that gets in their way of installing smileys.exe
Providing skinning abilities, or UI modularity (ala Glade for GTK and NIBs for OSX), such that you could eliminate or add elements to your UI -- the buttons and widgets simply pair up with under the hood events that get fired off based on events.
That way you could ship the 'same old' for the people who like it, and individuals could experiment with what they like 'more'.
Office 2007 probably isn't the best example of 'new design' in terms of success or failure -- Office long ago stopped being anything more than a dumping ground for committee sourced features that have nothing to do with providing a functional word processing environment -- rather catering/pandering to the perceived marketing requirements of the entire spectrum of users from amateur to pro. (Although for your post it's a good example of 'Hey you guys changed my thing!')
I'm confused. Isn't glade somewhat like the old VB or MFC? You could skin your application in Windows from a long time ago. Remember Winamp 1.0? Are you talking about OS UI or program UI?
And I wasn't talking about the features in Office 2007 like you are. I am just talking about the user interface which I think was the most major rehaul ever since the first version. And for that, MS got some major bitching around the place from previous Office users. Never mind that almost every new and casual user simply loves the new interface. And we had people on here saying that OO.o was much better for the Office 2003 folks to transition to, because it was more familiar.
This is not a reasonable argument. Nobody who has such an old CPU it doesn't support 64-bit has any business running Vista -- it will slower than a legless turtle stuck in a shoe(metric) and while Microsoft might stop selling Windows XP shortly, they certainly won't stop supporting it for quite a while. Microsoft should have not released 32-bit version of Vista.
It's not the CPU that needs to be 64 bit. 64bit OSes cannot run 32 bit drivers for any hardware.
The reason OSes strive to look good is the same reason you paint the walls in your house, or wash your car, or drive around in good looking cars instead of metallic unpainted cubes. The experience does matter to some degree.
Every review of every application and OS includes screenshots, because that's what people who want to have a quick look want to see. And a proper review will take a long time of use and writing to write. Looks like the writer just wanted to get a preview out real quick and called it a review.
Microsoft changed the interface of Office 2007 to make it much better all around(atleast for casual and new users). Look at the bad rap that it gave them on here and elsewhere for being unfamiliar to power users and people who are used to toolbars and 'File,Edit,View' menus. Look at what happened to KDE 4.0 And you want MS to radically alter the UI of a OS with 90% market share? Can you imagine the comments here starting with 'My grandma who used Windows since 95 got Windows 7 and.....' ? I bet the ribbonish interface itself in Windows 7 will not be well received by some people.
Every new OS version out there has to be a new code base and a overhaul of the entire framework? When was the Linux kernel overhauled? Probably NEVER since 18 years, when it was first built based on ideas from Minix. The oldest OS X was a overhaul but the next few versions were closer to MS service packs than even MS OS revisions.
Windows 7 does seem to contain many more features than a service pack. For example look at differences between Vista and it's SP1 and then between SP1 and Windows 7. It's not hard to believe that MS has got a new OS out so soon. Firstly, work on Windows 7 started before Vista was in final Beta/RC stages so it's longer than 18 months. Ironically, XP was released 18 months after 2000. A company the size of MS can work on only one thing at a time right? Good that you(and maybe the moderators that modded you up) don't run a software company, because throwing out the code instead of building on it is not always a good idea.
ZDNet pales in comparison to this site with respect to smart people and discussion format. When did technology loving nerds turn into blind fanboys? The Vista kernel has some cool features the other OSes don't, like network and I/O priority. Technical discussion about such things have been lost in all the 'M$ sucks' noise.
Slashdot Mirror
Who the hell keeps posting this garbage? I thought Peter Guttman's paper was thoroughly debunked. But we still have some ignorant karmawhoring people who like to chant "DRM DRM DRM".
Microsoft will release a public beta this week of its next desktop operating system, Windows 7, hoping it will address the problems that have made Windows Vista perhaps the least popular OS in its history. So, Vista failed because they didn't provide a public beta for it? How about addressing the increasingly long list of features people actually want instead of a resource intensive API to make my windows translucent? Or, making what was arguably Vista's best and at the same time worst feature (UAC) something that works without making itself so intrusive as to be the first time users desire to disable?!
No, it does not mean that. The "it" refers to the preceding noun "Windows 7", not the "public beta". There are already lots of fixes to the UAC which make it very less annoying. But looks like people like you are not bothered to actually find out, but just post some anti-MS tripe so that it gets modded up.
I agree. Nobody is selling 32-bit processors anymore.
Linux can handle 32-bit applications on 64-bit OSes. Surely MS can do the same?
They do. Look up WoW64. 32bit applications run seamlessly on 64bit XP and Vista and Windows 7.
That is true of casual and personal piracy. Not full scale commercial piracy, because the pirates actually charge people for the software. They don't give it away.
FTA:
In theory this is bad news for Microsoft: it would represent mass piracy and lost revenue.
Huh? A beta copy of Windows 7 represents mass piracy and lost revenue? The beta expires in July anyway, even if it's production quality. I guess any tripe will get posted on Slashdot if it's anti-Microsoft.
I don't know why is this marked as a troll. Both XP home and XP pro share the exact same code base, except that Home doesn't have stuff like IIS, Remote desktop server, etc.
Uhmm, the kicker is, I'm *STILL* running Win2k. And not only that, but I've got drivers from within the last year running on it for both my PCIe Radeon HD3650, and my Logitech Driving Force Pro. Nevermind that Realtek supports most of their chipset hardware all the way back to either Win9x or DOS, depending.
And the kicker of all this? Basically any game that doesn't require Windows Live and/or have a hardcoded check for XP will run and play fine on it.
WinXP for all intents and purposes was a rebadge of 2k with some additional eyecandy and a FEW interface changes. But the majority of said interface changes don't affect 90 percent of the applications out there.
Forced obsolescence is fine if there's a reason, but if your 10 year old OS has everything that a modern app needs to support it, there's no reason to upgrade. (Nevermind that 2k is the last windows version without that annoying Windows Activation stuff, and in fact is the reason I spent 300 bucks on it well after WinXP was out.)
Keep telling yourself that. But there are actually a lot of enhancements . And no, those are not UI enhancements(which there are a ton, like wireless stuff in xp sp2). Those are just kernel enhancements.
The problem exists because, if a user can install FireFox(or any other software) off the internet, they can install malware disguised as a useful program too. Windows, or any other OS or browser, cannot determine whether a said program is harmful(except Antivirus s/w like Defender). IE now gives multiple warnings and stops driveby downloads by default(pops up a bar on top) and allows downloads onyl if you click on a direct link etc. If OS X/Linux was popular and a legitimate looking site offered NiceGame.deb or NiceGame.dmg, won't many users(naive ones) download and install them beyond any warnings etc.? Either you make stuff absurdly hard to install(hence making FireFox hard to install), or use a whitelist like iPhone App Store(which stops all other sites from distributing s/w), ideas which won't be popular at all.
RAM is like 40$ per 8gig now. Graphics is not that important for vista.
There were screenshots of vista out long before RTM
That's because it's right now not worthwile for the bad folks to upload britney.dmg and britney.deb or britney.rpm to the filesharing sites.
That's not an option for MS, like for Apple, because there's a whole fuckton of Win32 applications and once those don't run well, everyone(including Slashdot) will be all over their ass for not being fully backward compatible.
WTF? Who keeps writing this drivel and who keeps modding this up just because it sounds right and is anti-MS? I have been using Vista 64-bit since more than a year and it does have a 32 bit subsystem.
You made the claim, sir, you get to back it up. You list a lot of presentations, none of which (by their titles) actually list improvements in Windows 7 over XP. Some titles, in fact, sound like they're an excuse to duplicate the errors of Vista, such as:
The next generation user experience for presenting commands in Win32 applications.
If that doesn't sound like an excuse to re-arrange and proprietize things to break backwards compatibility and help cut off XP users, I don't know what does.
I didn't make the claim. Learn to read and comprehend. Do you watch movies by reading the titles and watch entire multiple tv programs from the onscreen guide itself? And you're criticizing Windows 7 based on a title of a video? Wow, looks like you're already bent upon putting fingers in your ears and shouting 'la la la'. And you thanked the other poster for googling for you and giving you the first linke? Ignorance is not an excuse.
WTF? Are you just trolling for mod points like most of the people posting here or what? UAC prompt to delete shortcut from desktop? Uhh?
How hard is it to google or Wikipedia? I know it's easier asking others to spoonfeed them and counter them if they don't. Here are some videos if you're really interested.
How hard is it to open a terminal window (or use a Gnome applet which puts a terminal line on your taskbar) and type "sudo system-config-display" or whatever you need to run as root?
How hard is it to click a button when the UAC UI pops up? Still we have a lot of bitching about it going on. Users, especially non-power users, don't like anything that gets in their way of installing smileys.exe
Providing skinning abilities, or UI modularity (ala Glade for GTK and NIBs for OSX), such that you could eliminate or add elements to your UI -- the buttons and widgets simply pair up with under the hood events that get fired off based on events.
That way you could ship the 'same old' for the people who like it, and individuals could experiment with what they like 'more'.
Office 2007 probably isn't the best example of 'new design' in terms of success or failure -- Office long ago stopped being anything more than a dumping ground for committee sourced features that have nothing to do with providing a functional word processing environment -- rather catering/pandering to the perceived marketing requirements of the entire spectrum of users from amateur to pro. (Although for your post it's a good example of 'Hey you guys changed my thing!')
I'm confused. Isn't glade somewhat like the old VB or MFC? You could skin your application in Windows from a long time ago. Remember Winamp 1.0? Are you talking about OS UI or program UI?
And I wasn't talking about the features in Office 2007 like you are. I am just talking about the user interface which I think was the most major rehaul ever since the first version. And for that, MS got some major bitching around the place from previous Office users. Never mind that almost every new and casual user simply loves the new interface. And we had people on here saying that OO.o was much better for the Office 2003 folks to transition to, because it was more familiar.
You're doing it wrong. In order to be eligible for getting modded up, your post must be like this one .
This is not a reasonable argument. Nobody who has such an old CPU it doesn't support 64-bit has any business running Vista -- it will slower than a legless turtle stuck in a shoe(metric) and while Microsoft might stop selling Windows XP shortly, they certainly won't stop supporting it for quite a while. Microsoft should have not released 32-bit version of Vista.
It's not the CPU that needs to be 64 bit. 64bit OSes cannot run 32 bit drivers for any hardware.
The reason OSes strive to look good is the same reason you paint the walls in your house, or wash your car, or drive around in good looking cars instead of metallic unpainted cubes. The experience does matter to some degree.
Every review of every application and OS includes screenshots, because that's what people who want to have a quick look want to see. And a proper review will take a long time of use and writing to write. Looks like the writer just wanted to get a preview out real quick and called it a review.
Microsoft changed the interface of Office 2007 to make it much better all around(atleast for casual and new users). Look at the bad rap that it gave them on here and elsewhere for being unfamiliar to power users and people who are used to toolbars and 'File,Edit,View' menus. Look at what happened to KDE 4.0 And you want MS to radically alter the UI of a OS with 90% market share? Can you imagine the comments here starting with 'My grandma who used Windows since 95 got Windows 7 and.....' ? I bet the ribbonish interface itself in Windows 7 will not be well received by some people.
Every new OS version out there has to be a new code base and a overhaul of the entire framework? When was the Linux kernel overhauled? Probably NEVER since 18 years, when it was first built based on ideas from Minix. The oldest OS X was a overhaul but the next few versions were closer to MS service packs than even MS OS revisions.
Windows 7 does seem to contain many more features than a service pack. For example look at differences between Vista and it's SP1 and then between SP1 and Windows 7. It's not hard to believe that MS has got a new OS out so soon. Firstly, work on Windows 7 started before Vista was in final Beta/RC stages so it's longer than 18 months. Ironically, XP was released 18 months after 2000. A company the size of MS can work on only one thing at a time right? Good that you(and maybe the moderators that modded you up) don't run a software company, because throwing out the code instead of building on it is not always a good idea.
ZDNet pales in comparison to this site with respect to smart people and discussion format. When did technology loving nerds turn into blind fanboys? The Vista kernel has some cool features the other OSes don't, like network and I/O priority. Technical discussion about such things have been lost in all the 'M$ sucks' noise.