Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Leaked

timothy posted about 6 years ago | from the they're-prevolutionary dept.

GUI 587

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."

cancel ×

587 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sure those are pics? (5, Funny)

religious freak (1005821) | about 6 years ago | (#25116995)

Funny thing is they're not actually screen shots, they're running videos... guess they haven't fixed the memory management or paging issues in v7 either.

Re:Sure those are pics? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117025)

Erm... Did you try scrolling down? You know, to the screen shots?

Re:Sure those are pics? (3, Funny)

rishistar (662278) | about 6 years ago | (#25117311)

Yeah, but I don't think its that much like their currently pushed Microsoft OS. I mean, the screen shot offering a Russian Mail Order bride isn't something I've seen in Vista.

Re:Sure those are pics? (5, Informative)

something_wicked_thi (918168) | about 6 years ago | (#25117333)

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.

Frist post (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25116997)

MMM pictures!

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25116999)

still here! [tinyurl.com]

Pointless (5, Insightful)

abigsmurf (919188) | about 6 years ago | (#25117023)

The GUI is one of the later things to be implemented in a windows development cycle, of course it's going to look like Vista.

That said, given that aero was one of the nicer things about Vista, I imagine they'll base the GUI on it but make it look different enough to elminite comparissons between vista.

Ideally they'll strike a balance between the prettyness of vista and the functionality and performance of XP.

Re:Pointless (4, Insightful)

arktemplar (1060050) | about 6 years ago | (#25117201)

I hope they don't keep that. If microsoft wants to prevent the bad press associated with vista - they may need to make it un-vista-like atleast superficially.

Re:Pointless (5, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | about 6 years ago | (#25117363)

Ideally they'll strike a balance between the prettyness of vista and the functionality and performance of XP.

Call me oldfashioned, but I still use XP with the Win2000 interface. Much cleaner and faster to me.

Re:Pointless (5, Insightful)

CheShACat (999169) | about 6 years ago | (#25117377)

Call me old fashioned, but I still use Unix with the command line interface. Much cleaner and faster to me.

Re:Pointless (1, Informative)

Sique (173459) | about 6 years ago | (#25117473)

I do if I really have to work ;) Running XP I fire up Cygwin though.

Re:Pointless (3, Funny)

Enter the Shoggoth (1362079) | about 6 years ago | (#25117525)

Call me old fashioned, but I still use TOPS-20 with a teletype...

Re:Pointless (2, Funny)

Enter the Shoggoth (1362079) | about 6 years ago | (#25117535)

...and that's only since I recently upgraded from a plugboard

Re:Pointless (1)

Enter the Shoggoth (1362079) | about 6 years ago | (#25117553)

Perhaps I should finally get around to putting my abacus and slide rule on eBay

Re:Pointless (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about 6 years ago | (#25117543)

Call me oldfashioned, but I still use XP with the Win2000 interface. Much cleaner and faster to me.

What about the XP Search Doggy?

Re:Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117623)

what about it?

Re:Pointless (3, Insightful)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 6 years ago | (#25117365)

Ideally they'll strike a balance between the prettyness of vista and the functionality and performance of XP.

Actually, I'd rather have the performance of Windows 2000, the functionality of Windows XP and the GUI of.... Windows 2000.

In case it gets slashdotted (5, Funny)

Big Nothing (229456) | about 6 years ago | (#25117031)

For those of you who cannot read the article due to slashdotting, here are some highlights:

* It's main color is no longer blue, it's brown
* The default desktop image features a graphical heron
* The start button is now a circular orange button
* Task bars or "Panels" can now be found both at the top of the screen AND at the bottom.
* The new graphical bells and whistles previously referred to as Vista Aero is now called "Beryl".
* Beryl is cooler and runs much smoother than Aero. It requires much less hardware power than Aero.
* The new version of Windows is said to be much more stable and secure than any previous version.

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117215)

Sounds a bit like it was developed by interface Nazis. Think I'll stick to KDE, thanks!

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (1)

bky1701 (979071) | about 6 years ago | (#25117253)

I only use bash, you insensitive clod!

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117249)

For those of you who cannot read the article due to slashdotting, here are some highlights:

* It's main color is no longer blue, it's brown
* The default desktop image features a graphical heron
* The start button is now a circular orange button
* Task bars or "Panels" can now be found both at the top of the screen AND at the bottom.
* The new graphical bells and whistles previously referred to as Vista Aero is now called "Beryl".
* Beryl is cooler and runs much smoother than Aero. It requires much less hardware power than Aero.
* The new version of Windows is said to be much more stable and secure than any previous version.

In related news Websters revises it's definition of "Upgrade" under pressure from Microsoft. In other news Microsoft files for trademark status on the term "Upgrade".

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (1)

dosius (230542) | about 6 years ago | (#25117319)

Beryl? Ugh, don't they realize she was a *villain* ?

-uso.

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (4, Informative)

teh kurisu (701097) | about 6 years ago | (#25117403)

I realise you're taking the piss, but...

  • Task bars or "Panels" can now be found both at the top of the screen AND at the bottom.

Not new to Windows. I'm pretty sure you've been able to do this since Windows 98.

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (1)

Filip22012005 (852281) | about 6 years ago | (#25117481)

While I could be learning something new today, are you sure about that? Maybe OR, but not AND...

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (5, Informative)

teh kurisu (701097) | about 6 years ago | (#25117575)

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 :)

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117613)

Even if youre wrong I not gonna shoot you. Windoze is-a usability nightmare anyways and moving toolbars around cannot fix.

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (2, Insightful)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 6 years ago | (#25117461)

Sure, sure, but what I want to know is: does it have a screenshot of the command line?

Re:In case it gets slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117503)

* It's main color is no longer blue, it's brown

So we'll have Brown Screen of Death now?

From what I hear... (4, Insightful)

PinkyDead (862370) | about 6 years ago | (#25117035)

Look and Feel isn't the problem with Vista.

A todo list would be a far more valuable leak at this point if MS want to change their fortune.

Re:From what I hear... (1, Informative)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 6 years ago | (#25117125)

Look and feel isn't the main problem with Vista.

Fixed.

Re:From what I hear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117307)

Look and Feel is the main problem with Vista.

That's why Ubuntu and Mac guys get all the cool girls, you insensitive clod.

Re:From what I hear... (1)

aussie_a (778472) | about 6 years ago | (#25117565)

It mentions that the UAC only popped up once during an install. This seems quite good to me, although I'm not sure how many times it would pop up when installing the same program under Vista.

Australian PC Authority? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117043)

Australian PC Authority? Since it's in Oz:

SKIPPY: Tt-t-t-t
MATT HAMMOND: What's that Skip?
SKIPPY: T-tt-tt t-t
MATT HAMMOND: Windows 7's stuck down the well?!
SKIPPY: T-tt-t
MATT HAMMOND: Steve Ballmer "fucking buried" it there, for being too much like Windows Vista?

Like the oldies, cheap shots are the goodies.

*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (4, Interesting)

apathy maybe (922212) | about 6 years ago | (#25117053)

As far as I can tell, there is nothing that looks really really special that would prompt me to shift off what I'm running now. The fact that they still require malware protection (evidenced by the "we can't detect any anti-virus software, panic" screen), tempts me to question why they haven't focused more energy on securing the system.

The only really interesting thing I saw was the sharing option, "homegroup"? Could be interesting. But overall, nothing revolutionary.

Come to think about it, I remember reading before MS Windows XP came out about all the wonderful things that were going to be in it. Yet, when it did come out, it wasn't a revolution, just more gradual changes.

This promises more of the same.

So, as I said, I'll stay with Ubuntu, because if nothing else, at least it runs on my machine with only 512 MB of ram. (I'm poor, and it works, why would I upgrade?)

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (4, Insightful)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 6 years ago | (#25117205)

Come to think about it, I remember reading before MS Windows XP came out about all the wonderful things that were going to be in it. Yet, when it did come out, it wasn't a revolution, just more gradual changes.

And before Windows 95, they promised a badass new system codenamed Cairo, remember that? It would rival what NeXT and IBM had back then... and people believed that shit. Always keep in mind, Microsoft is a master in overpromise and underdelivery.

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (4, Funny)

ozphx (1061292) | about 6 years ago | (#25117405)

If you cant afford a 2 gig stick of ram you can't afford the power to run a computer. Or food.

Get a job, hippy.

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (5, Informative)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 6 years ago | (#25117453)

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".

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (1, Redundant)

ozphx (1061292) | about 6 years ago | (#25117643)

It true. 512meg is enough for light use. My partner's laptop is still at default spec, and it works fine for her, and the botnet shes part of (loves those toolbars) ;)

I use mine (same model - bottom end lenovo 3000) for development (VS, etc) - 4 gig ram though - about $80 AUD. The only downside is the shitty hitachi hard drive - terrible performance there, but superfetch does help.

These are bottom end $500 laptops, so its hard to imagine how cheap an equivalent desktop would be. ($250??) If you can't afford the hardware to run the OS - then, frankly, you aren't in the target market.

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (5, Funny)

gingerTabs (532664) | about 6 years ago | (#25117551)

(I'm poor, and it works, why would I upgrade?)

You are the cause of the credit crunch! Support the economy with inappropriate consumerism

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (-1, Flamebait)

aussie_a (778472) | about 6 years ago | (#25117605)

tempts me to question why they haven't focused more energy on securing the system.

No matter how secure a system is, it can still be vulnerable to attack. Ubuntu users would learn this if it gained 60% of the market share tomorrow.

I'll stay with Ubuntu

I would love to upgrade to Ubuntu (using Windows XP). Unfortunately I've tried (along with tried Fedora Core) and in both cases my internet connection was much slower then in Windows XP. Clearly its a driver issue, one fundamental to Linux given its appeared in two OSes. But it doesn't help people like me (I have a fairly average computer, a couple of years old).

Re:*Yawn*, I think I'll stick with Ubuntu. (1, Offtopic)

Samah (729132) | about 6 years ago | (#25117609)

The fact that they still require malware protection (evidenced by the "we can't detect any anti-virus software, panic" screen)

I think you'll find Microsoft don't include some kind of anti-virus system with Windows because it would break antitrust law [wikipedia.org] . Users would be less likely to look to other AV solutions, and Norton/McAfee/etc. would lose sales.

And the one they missed out (4, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | about 6 years ago | (#25117065)

They missed this one [wikimedia.org] from their screen-shots.

I'm surprised (0, Offtopic)

garatheus (993376) | about 6 years ago | (#25117077)

OK: so not so much article related... but anyways.
I'm surprised this is only hitting Slashdot now. It was on Lifehacker yesterday! What's happening with Slashdot these days - I've always relied on it to keep me informed of technology and interesting news before anywhere else...

Re:I'm surprised (5, Informative)

dword (735428) | about 6 years ago | (#25117129)

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.

Re:I'm surprised (3, Informative)

Mornedhel (961946) | about 6 years ago | (#25117427)

Ah, nope.

Slashdot is CmdrTaco's blog [slashdot.org] .

Re:I'm surprised (1)

eebra82 (907996) | about 6 years ago | (#25117211)

I've always relied on it to keep me informed of technology and interesting news before anywhere else...

Well, the continuum transfunctioner isn't working properly. Sadly, Slashdot's submitted articles are posted after the source.

winfs? (1)

Pink Fandango (1336947) | about 6 years ago | (#25117083)

Is it running on top of winfs?

Powershell (0, Troll)

prayag (1252246) | about 6 years ago | (#25117099)

Windows Powershell is installed by default. May be that would help it break into the mainstream.

mmm (1)

Rikiji7 (1182159) | about 6 years ago | (#25117119)

Will another vista-like gui save windows users from another vista-like system?

Why do we say 'Leaked'? (5, Insightful)

CuteSteveJobs (1343851) | about 6 years ago | (#25117123)

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?

"Windows 7 Beta Screenshots Released"
Fix'd!

Re:Why do we say 'Leaked'? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117177)

As Groucho would have said: "Windows leaks, but I repeat myself."

Re:Why do we say 'Leaked'? (2, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | about 6 years ago | (#25117185)

Caused, released is boring, makes it sound like anyone else before you has seen them. Leaked makes it sound like someone just dropped a brown envelope on your desk.

Re:Why do we say 'Leaked'? (4, Informative)

Stan Vassilev (939229) | about 6 years ago | (#25117301)

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.

This is a good thing. (4, Interesting)

onion2k (203094) | about 6 years ago | (#25117137)

With a product that's been stable for a long time (stable in the development sense, not in the 'not crashing' sense) you shouldn't expect any large changes between major versions, and no changes at all between minors. You don't just throw away decades of work to make it different for the sake of it. If there are any differences they're probably only there because the marketing department demanded something obviously different so people would upgrade for the new eye candy. Or, at a push, because some HCI guru has had a brainwave about how to make things radically easier to work with. That's very rare though.

Frankly, the fact it looks very similar is a good thing. It might mean MSFT aren't just doing some window dressing.

Re:This is a good thing. (1)

ozphx (1061292) | about 6 years ago | (#25117489)

Good call. It was the same with Vista. The Aero desktop was an important upgrade to how compositing was done. It was also an opportunity to throw in some crap eye candy to assist in selling it to noobs.

The majority of Vistas upgrades were in the background - kernel improvements, better transaction support, better driver model, "improved" UAC and default security (pity Windows programmers, in general, suck at following the >5 year old guidelines). Stuff you cannot sell to the public because they don't really care.

It should be the same on the surface, slightly more polished, with better services avaliable so people can make better apps quicker. Hopefully soon they'll start removing legacy crud.

Seriously, its not like "Windows 7: Forget what you are used to and start learning how to Get On the Internets again!" is a great slogan. Or maybe "Windows 7: We replaced the Blue E to piss _you_ off Mr Sixpack. You'll never guess how to get Internets now!!"

well (1)

tatermonkey (1199435) | about 6 years ago | (#25117141)

But is the blue screen of death (bsod) still blue? Or have they changed that one finally?

Re:well (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | about 6 years ago | (#25117229)

The product is now so stable they have been able to remove the bsod code completely.

Ribbon Bars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117149)

Am I the only one who is upset with the ribbon bars in paint and wordpad?

Re:Ribbon Bars (4, Funny)

erikdalen (99500) | about 6 years ago | (#25117423)

Yeah, you're the only one using those applications.

corporate leakage (0, Troll)

jipn4 (1367823) | about 6 years ago | (#25117159)

Looks like Microsoft's PR department is trying to generate buzz for another boring OS.

Interface "changes" (0, Troll)

Auckerman (223266) | about 6 years ago | (#25117161)

As far as I can see, the only real changes to the interface of Windows since Windows 95 relate to colors of buttons and default display of objects. The objects are still there and you can go back to the old default. Application launch, Window switching, Application layout, System Setting changes, Window/menu placements, and all the other core features of the GUI have not changed at all since Windows 95. It's the same thing with each release. It's a 13 year old interface that is showing its age. I personally think it's high time Microsoft did what Apple did with the release of OS X, try something new because what they have now is garbage.

Re:Interface "changes" (5, Insightful)

Nightspirit (846159) | about 6 years ago | (#25117231)

They can't really do anything else without pissing off a majority of their customers. Lets face it, if they put in a dock or unified titlebar on the top everyone would lambaste them for copying Apple, not to mention there are 3rd party apps that have the same functionality, which may put them in an antitrust situation.

The only annoying thing about vista UI is UAC, and from the article it appears that they possibly fixed that. I was envious of expose, but then I installed Switcher, and while it may not have the same functionality, I'm content.

The only things I would like out of windows 7 is for it to use less resources, improve UAC, and increase security. The last thing I want is a total UI overhaul or total rewrite making 98% of my programs run slower in emulation mode, or not run at all.

Re:Interface "changes" (1)

Auckerman (223266) | about 6 years ago | (#25117407)

There are things they can do, but aren't. UAC doesn't solve anything, all it does is make the user annoyed. The programmer who caused UAC to fire up and tell the user that the program is trying to do something stupid doesn't care if the user is annoyed. He cares about production cost and knows damn well that the user blames Windows instead of the program. Why hasn't Microsoft created a way to do what Application bundles do on OS X? Drag and drop installs with full metadata support for supported files and cross application access of share libs all done on the fly without every loading anything at boot or changing a single thing in the registry. Why can't Windows do that? Why is it still possible to create an application that can only be run by Admin? Why isn't the entire Windows directory structure completely segregated from the application space which is in turn completely segregated from the user space? Why is it even possible for an application to install ANYTHING in your taskbar? Why can't the user have a formal list of launch items to prevent all non operating system elements from loading on login and still have all applications works exactly as intended? OS X is better than Windows for home use not just because of the widget lay out and management services, but because FUBARing the OS actually takes real work on the part of the user and the application developer. The very core of Windows is completely broken, the now failed experiment with UAC was an attempt to dress up pig so that they could buy more time to think the problem out.

Re:Interface "changes" (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | about 6 years ago | (#25117463)

Really? I'd like to see Treacherous Computing out of Windows 7. That's one of my major concerns.

Re:Interface "changes" (1)

Kokuyo (549451) | about 6 years ago | (#25117491)

Don't forget the kick to the 'nads for DRM integration. I'm game if they just get rid of that crap.

Re:Interface "changes" (1)

ozphx (1061292) | about 6 years ago | (#25117527)

improve UAC, and increase security

More security is usually more annoyance unfortunately.

The cancel or allow bullshit comes up, in general, because some crappy program is trying to do something which really does require elevation. Windows does try to be nice, and has quite a few dodgy hacks - shoving writes to /Program Files/ in ~/AppData/VirtualStore/Program Files/ etc. Similar with registry virtualisation.

Theres probably a bunch of API calls that could be called with lower permissions, but it would be a pain to isolate them without introducing some serious local exploits.

You'd think after 5 years of developing under the XP guidelines that developers wouldnt be fucking up anymore. :S

I'd actually call a per-user XP VM coming preinstalled with some hacks to share /home pretty damn awesome. The "It looks like you are trying to run some crap software written by a monkey. Well, you can't. Go mess up this VM with your crap." and "Cancel" or "Aaargh!".

Re:Interface "changes" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117467)

From Wikipedia. "An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussiom

Explain how the parent post fits that definition.

Re:Interface "changes" (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about 6 years ago | (#25117593)

Because it was posted by a Mac user.

Who cares about screenshots (1)

DrugCheese (266151) | about 6 years ago | (#25117173)

Microsoft UI has always been behind the curve in my opinion. Since most people know they have to re-learn where and sometimes how to interact with each new Microsoft release why do people care what it looks like. Do default border color and a new desktop background really get peoples E.D. to relapse?

Yes I looked at the pictures. Woooo.

It looks just fine (4, Insightful)

eebra82 (907996) | about 6 years ago | (#25117175)

From what I understand, and from personal experience, the way Vista looks is not the problem. It wouldn't make sense for them to invest so much money in a new look and then dump it. After all, if we take a look at previous Windows versions, this doesn't happen very often. Additionally, you can customize Vista in a million ways with the plethora of skins out there.

Windows 7 will be a hit if they focus on what people have been complaining about, which is largely the sluggish performance - and this is what we should devote our attention to.

Re:It looks just fine (1)

microbee (682094) | about 6 years ago | (#25117337)

While I agree with your point with performance, every major Windows changed its look in some significant ways: Windows 95 had a start menu and all, Windows 98 had sliding menus, I don't quite remember Windows 2000 but it was a combo of Windows 9x and NT, and everyone still remembers XP and Vista.

So I'd be very surprised if they won't change the UI.

I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista... (4, Insightful)

subreality (157447) | about 6 years ago | (#25117183)

The name. They couldn't figure out how to salvage Vista trademark, so they're just making some relatively minor changes, and releasing it with a new name.

Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | about 6 years ago | (#25117247)

I look forward to the renaming and release of Microsoft ViXP

Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (1)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 6 years ago | (#25117591)

Wouldn't "Microsoft Vixen" be even better? ;-)

Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (1)

CheShACat (999169) | about 6 years ago | (#25117435)

They aren't even that coy about it; they admit they've been doing some market research [mojaveexperiment.com] .

Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (1)

Stan Vassilev (939229) | about 6 years ago | (#25117517)

The name. They couldn't figure out how to salvage Vista trademark, so they're just making some relatively minor changes, and releasing it with a new name.

So let me ask you, what would you, in all your wisdom, do if you woke up tommorow as the product manager of Windows tommorow?

If you would "shut down and give the money to the shareholders", or you would "drop all code and start over", you'd be the lousiest product manager in the history of software development.

Re:I can see they fixed the big problem with Vista (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 6 years ago | (#25117631)

If you would "shut down and give the money to the shareholders"

oops. [bbc.co.uk]

Well, they've got to prop the share price up somehow.

So, it's basically Windows Vista again then? (0, Redundant)

AbRASiON (589899) | about 6 years ago | (#25117199)

Look at this?
http://www.thinknext.net/content/2008/09/win7/Computer-menu1.png [thinknext.net]

I don't like to blow my own horn (ok I do) but really, that might be good for jimmy and billy smith and perhaps mom but that interface does not bring enough data into my eyes / brain fast enough, it looks convolouted and confusing.

I'd like to re-post for the 1000'th time why I don't like Vista (read if you like, but you don't have to)
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=364823&cid=21406737 [slashdot.org]
(note, one or two small mistakes in there but mostly correct)

My issues with Vista are usability and logic.
I realise some users don't care about the finer details but ultimately I do feel there are enough smart users out there who simply won't put up with such a 'fluffy' and unpleasant interface.

I can not bring the data into my brain quick enough, things are not in logical places, things are messy and convoluted, some things take longer to do and some bugs have been introduced into explorer while old ones remain (what!)
Example, opening explorer with mapped network drives and cd-roms / dvd-roms IS STILL GOD - DAMNED @#%ING SLOW (sorry)
Why, why is it slow in 2008?
Not only is it slow, it's almost precisely and utterly slow as it always was back in 1998 with Win 98 and 95.
I am thoroughly and utterly convinced the morons at Microsoft have simply used the same piece of explorer code since day 1, it has NOT been re-written from scratch.
As a very very heavy explorer user, I can simply 'feel' it. I know it sounds ridiculous but that's how it is.

Why is it, that they don't simply cache what was previously located on previously mapped network / dvd drives and then in a seperate thread or process then poll these drives, while maintaining a completely consistent user interface, in the background?
Take note that I'm not a coder and I apologise for speaking of which I don't understand but from my base level of knowledge, is this not possible?!

It feels sluggish, just as it did under XP and frankly that's not good enough, it needs an entire overhaul.

While I'm at it, I'm a dork, I mean I'm a tech here, you'know - I'm not even smart or good at user interface design, I have an opinion and I haven't been to university but I mean I feel as if *I* could do a better job.
To get to my point on this, the 'up arrow' has been removed from explorer.
This was a quick and simple button which took you one level higher in the folder view.
Ok that's fine Vista does that with breadcrums, but the breadcrumb physical location on the explorer interface could be anywhere - depending on the length of the path you're looking at.
In a maximised window of explorer, the green 'up' arrow is _ALWAYS_ consistent and that means simplicity, logic and convienience, why is this so god-damned hard?

This also applies to the 'folders' button which takes a 'single window' explorer view of a folder and it's contents and converts it into a 'full explorer' view of said folder AND the folders to the left of it in the entire tree view. It's a simple button but good jesus it's convienient and easy and helps me navigate quicker to get things done faster.
I want my computer performance and my slow hands / brain hampering me, not a stupid interface.

Futhermore again,..... I find that folder 'behaviour' and explorer behaviour is not consistent, you click a folder and sometimes it does X sometimes it does Y, sometimes a view does refresh, other times not.
Windows XP however is simple, easy, fast - and yes to clarify I *was* one of the XP whiners back when it first came out, for about 6 months but I adopted it.
In XP, they added classic view which was as good as 2000 or better and virtually identical to boot (not so for Vista classic) furthermore the primary concerns were performance, driver etc in XP, patchable and fixable.
In Vista however, (IMHO) the issues are usability and interface, I am *not* one of those performance / compatibility / driver whiners, I realise these can and will be addressed, it's that core UI which angers me so!

Here's another example.
http://abrasion.shackspace.com/WTF.wmv [shackspace.com]
Windows Media format 9.

Look at the behaviour of that explorer window under Vista, XP did not behave this way.
Now I can understand the argument that I'm not directly clicking the files / folders and therefore they shouldn't have to update but it's still highlighting them, isn't it?
I mean it's EASIER to be able to click slightly to the right, if you miss - it's time saving, you don't need to be as precise - we want usability here.
This is just one, of many, many subtle little issues in Vista which were BETTER under XP - what the mother f...... (sorry but this makes me angry as hell)

I have now tried Windows Vista no less than 6 times, longest being about 3 weeks, I thought I was finally going to convert but I simply can't do it.
The only thing I've seen which is better, is the media centre, it's simply 'busted' in XP MCE - it breaks with .NET or WMP11 installs and all kinds of stuff, incredibly finicky - so my TV card sits idle and I don't care, Vista is just ... meh!

I may have mentioned in the other post which I linked also, I'm not a mac lover in any way, I dislike the mob mentality and blind following of them (don't get me started on the new nano) but the interface in OSx blew me away, I had no choice but to give credit where credit is due!.
The concept of each application having a file / edit / view menu being always in a consistent location at the top is genius absoloute simple genius - it's always in the same place, where you want it, easily - consistency is absoloutely vital (and I'm not even a UI advisor / developer!)

The most frightening thing about all this is that Vista was in beta for so long, tested for so long, yet somehow these smaller, simpler little things were ignored and I have no doubt will be ignored in Windows 7, I mean it's pessimistic but really, do you think they'll address these little annoyance?

What annoys me most is I rarely find people who disagree with these points, it's not like I'm asking for a total overhaul, just some simple logic and convienience, but do you think they'll change this? No, I'm a single voice, I can rant all I want on /. but it's not going to fix the damn UI and XP isn't going to last forever, I will have to concede or switch at some point won't I?

Honestly it's like their trying to drive me to Ubuntu or OSx it really is.

Windows 7 = Vista Masked, Renamed (1)

rainhill (86347) | about 6 years ago | (#25117225)

Nothing new here..

Re:Windows 7 = Vista Masked + cosmetic changes (1)

yvesdandoy (44789) | about 6 years ago | (#25117299)

at least it's what it looks like ... plus a pretented brand new OS in such a short time frame, no f.....g way !

Even if you polish a turd... (2, Informative)

caluml (551744) | about 6 years ago | (#25117243)

Why does the phrase "Even if you polish a turd, it's still a turd" come into my mind?
Try Ubuntu 8.04 with an ATI/Nvidia/Intel graphics card, and install "ccsm", and play with all the options. I have actually grown to like the "wobbly windows" that act a little like sheets of paper.

Re:Even if you polish a turd... (1)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | about 6 years ago | (#25117381)

Huh... I would have with putting lipstick on a pig.

Instead of appealing to the "oooo shiny" crowd... (1)

Viol8 (599362) | about 6 years ago | (#25117257)

...with yet another desperate GUI attempt to catch up with OS/X, why don't they release the tentative minimum CPU and memory specs for the OS so people will know if they'll be able to boot it and run up notepad with anything less than a 5Ghz 4 core machine with 1 terabyte of memory.

Re:Instead of appealing to the "oooo shiny" crowd. (0, Troll)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 6 years ago | (#25117305)

Instead of appealing to the "oooo shiny" crowd with yet another desperate GUI attempt to catch up with OS/X

And what makes the Mac interface great is not even that in the first place; it's the fact that it is well-planned, well-designed, easy to use. No matter how much "shiny" you put on Windows, it will remain an inferior interface, even compared to OS 9 -- in fact 9 beats X in a few interface aspects.

Re:Instead of appealing to the "oooo shiny" crowd. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117373)

It's all subjective. When I tried a Mac, there was an error with a program - but instead of it telling me what the problem was, the icon got a little question mark on it. When I clicked on it, it bounced.

What does that even mean? Is it not starting? Is it already open? Is the bouncing some kind of metaphor for the futility of human existance?

Pretty ugly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117275)

Disappointed.
The ugliness of Vista is one of the reasons why I won't use it, yeah superficial I know. (Yes, there doesn't seem to be any real reason to upgrade from XP).
A good sign Vista was going to be ugly (XP default is ugly, but no-one sticks with that either) was the design of IE7. I've never seen such an ugly, bad designed and implements Windows program.

Will there be something else new other than GUI? (1)

azgard (461476) | about 6 years ago | (#25117285)

They are posting about ribbons and screenshots in Windows 7, but I wonder, will there be any other improvements aside from GUI?

With a barrel of salt and a pinch of mixed metapho (4, Insightful)

Bozovision (107228) | about 6 years ago | (#25117347)

If you are in marketing, and have a dog of a product to sell, a good tactic is to focus attention on the jam that you'll be selling tomorrow. Of course you don't actually have the jam yet, and you're still selling borg-daschund, so you can't just come out and say 'hey we have this radical NEW NEW softwares so much much better than the old tired limp one you are using to wash your spreadsheets'. So you behave like a hose. A drip here. A leak there. And before you know it all the people are clustered around the tiny tiny pastures of green in a desert of grey, saying 'wowser, check that colour scheme out'. Such a pity that they can't click to discover that the buttons don't do anything, but that's someone elses job and Bob is on an extended five year coffee break.

Don't get too excited people. Remember that Microsoft is incapable of shifting an OS in the timescales that we've seen casually prognosticated. By the beginning of 2010 Vista will have hit its sweet spot in terms of hardware, and the drivers will be mature. That would be the worst time of all to introduce Vista2. Look to about 2012 for the next version, once Vista has peaked.

Microsoft are in a monopolists market, there's no need for them to improve Vista in the short term despite the screams of pain from users. And anyway, the way to maintain dominance when you are the market leader is to force changes, so that your competition looks like followers; there's no way back for them.

Executive summary: don't wait, at best this is a distraction. Go make some software. You be the leaders now.

Re:With a barrel of salt and a pinch of mixed meta (1)

noundi (1044080) | about 6 years ago | (#25117547)

The funny thing is: I JUST commented the "leak" of the Google phone in another site. These "leak" conspiracies shouldn't be encouraged. Let's just use the word release instead, my guess is we'd be more often correct than vice versa.

Re:With a barrel of salt and a pinch of mixed meta (4, Insightful)

ozphx (1061292) | about 6 years ago | (#25117573)

By the beginning of 2010 Vista will have hit its sweet spot in terms of hardware

The wha?

Tip: With ram at around $20 a gig, the people running around screaming that Vista won't run on ten bucks (512meg) of RAM should probably not be considering a $200 OS. It doesnt run on the free toy you get with a happy meal either.

DAMN YOU RONALD MCDONALD... DAMN YOUUUUU!

they missed the trick (0)

apodyopsis (1048476) | about 6 years ago | (#25117393)

when the asus ee came out it heralded a revolution in computing - a genuine low cost device that would perform all the simple tasks asked off it with a long battery life and portable.

in the same way I like linux as it removes the vast majority of the worthless eye candy from a modern operating system.

vista (for me) is the sum of everything I hate about modern operating systems - far too much eye candy and not enough substance. it is ludicrous to believe that you need a P4 + 2GB of RAM to read email and browse the net, but you do need it to run aero. but do you need aero to read emails and browse the net? of course not.

windows 7 looks to be more of the same, and I will be just as disinterested.

and to be fair, its not just windows that has the same issue..

the newer aus ees and sub-notebooks are once again in a performance and features war. now 10" screens, now HDD not flash, battery life is shortening. and the price is rising. i find this very disheartening indeed - I would of been much more impressed if they had set the boundary on price (i.e. the sub $300 range) and then people had attempted to fit whatever they could into that price range and let competition take care of the rest.

also the new distros have the same issue - I'm sure that KDE4 is the mutts nuts, but to me it is more eye candy that will slow my PC down and get in the way of what I want to do. but here the flexibility of linux rules out, if you do not like the WM then simply install another. with MS you get windows shoveled down your throat if you want it or not.

I can categorically state that there is no way I will willingly buy or run Vista at home, and the same looks to apply to Win7 based on what I have seen.

for all the new technology and better software I would much rather see the focus on delivering more stable, faster, leaner systems that run on cheaper hardware more reliably on longer. I am totally disinterested in eye candy, effects, and features that add nothing in the way of functionality yet remove a lot in the way of performance. I just think their focus is seriously wrong.

just my 2$, sorry if I rambled.

meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117519)

still looks like shit. I'll stick with Debian thanks....

The screenshots page has a tojan (1)

psergiu (67614) | about 6 years ago | (#25117523)

The screenshots page http://www.thinknext.net/archives/2268 [thinknext.net] linked from the article tries to download & execute the following files:
ucsb_evoting_attack_dl_small.3gp
sa.aspx

Linking trojans from /. - that's a 1st !

Re:The screenshots page has a tojan (2, Informative)

ledow (319597) | about 6 years ago | (#25117595)

Er... you might want to check your machine.

Admittedly, I'm running Opera but I didn't see anything of the sort in the page code. Maybe you hit a bad advert or maybe you've got something your end that's doing that?

How many CTOs are going to think: (1)

blind biker (1066130) | about 6 years ago | (#25117541)

"Well, it's almost here - might as well wait for Windows 7 and skip Vista altogether".

My guess is: almost all.

Screenshots (3, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | about 6 years ago | (#25117569)

To be honest, I don't care what it looks like. So long as there's a "classic" option, that'll do, but I have much bigger problems that are not addressed by releasing videos/screenshots.

I don't care what it looks like SO LONG as it has something I need. It doesn't look like it. In fact, it looks like they jiggered the Vista menus and toolbars a bit, renamed a few items, etc. These are changes I expect to see between SVN versions 7348738 and 7348740 of a window manager, not a "show-off" of the next version of Windows.

The main problem I have with Windows is the laughable security - just look at that warning next to "no anti-virus software found"... those sorts of messages make me crease up.

Antivirus software is like employing a $30/year, 500lb security guard to sit on the front step of your house and "confront" burglars, but who can't actually do anything to them because he can't stand up (and even if he could, why would he bother at $30/year?), while leaving all your doors and windows open and a ladder up to your bedroom out the back with a large sign that says "Free stuff inside" attached to it. Security Centre and UAC are like a nosey neighbour who you can't get rid of (without a lot of hassle) that likes to tell you that your security guard didn't come into work today or that some people walked out with tons of your gear but he didn't bother to call the police or anything.

Also, I hate the pathetic attempts to set standards for everyone, rather than letting the users adjust Windows to their liking. Even Vista's "classic" mode isn't like it should be, it's impossible to get things exactly how they were in XP. And somehow the OS thinks it "knows better" than you. I daresay it does most of the time but the point is that sometimes IT DOESN'T and I need to override it, whether that's simple and personal (I don't WANT to know that I don't have antivirus, I don't WANT a new start menu) or complicated and technical (e.g. if I'm setting modelines in X). Don't like the new ribbon? Well.. tough really. We've splatted it over everything from Paint to Wordpad.

I don't know if the release of Windows 7 is trying to cover for Vista's "mistake" (which, of course, MS has done quite well out of anyway because of the usual reasons) or whether they really think that people will want to upgrade to Vista and then to Windows 7 within the space of three or four years. Tell me that WinFS is in it, tell me it doesn't NEED antivirus or a third-party firewall any more (you could still install it, obviously, but if it didn't need it, who would?), tell me you've condensed all the versions into one quite-cheap version with no artificial limitations, tell me it's got some radical new ideas that nobody's seen before, tell me anything... but don't show me screenshots that I could mock up in seconds using Vista's menu and a quick Photoshop. Don't show me "features" that would take about 20 minutes each to write once the windowing/toolbar code was properly seperated out into new libraries. Don't show me even more of the same rubbish that I can't stand Vista for.

In the meantime, I've got to print off that antivirus screenshot and pin it on my wall to laugh at occasionally.

Vista is Windows 7. (0, Redundant)

hrensgory (1049774) | about 6 years ago | (#25117571)

Windows 7??? If I count it correctly - it must be Windows Vista!
3. Windows 3/3.11/NT 3.5
4. Windows 95/ NT 4.0
5. Windows ME/ Windows NT 2000
6. Windows XP/ Windows Server 2003
7. Windows Vista/Windows Server 2008.
I remember that couple of months ago Microsoft did an experiment when they shown Vista as "beta of Windows 7" to people that don't know Vista.. just to check people reaction. Amusing that slashdot got lured too...

leakage? (0, Redundant)

thesappho (1293114) | about 6 years ago | (#25117579)

they always leak? and critisms leak, suggestions leak, etc.

The problem with windows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25117637)

Windows 7 will be considered by many to be a resounding success, if and only if it enables performance measurably superior to windows XP, and reliability measurably superior to windows Vista, and occupies less HD space/ RAM then either.

If they can do that, then they can deliver what 99% of computer users really want an OS to be - something that just gets out of the way and works.

They might yet pull it off, but given their proven track record of being abysmal at the business of software engineering, I doubt it.

It doesn't help that their ludicrous irresponsibility in resource requirements helps drive hardware sales in the PC sector. Seriously, it's long past starting to show how inept they are at coding for performance. Just look at how well ubuntu or mac os x runs on the same system as Vista. It's a joke, and I imagine it's largely to do with incompetence right where microsoft has allowed it to live.

It doesn't matter how fast the computer is if you design in the wrong algorithm for the task. And if your entire software development company is built around the idea of "closed source, only expose the interface", then sub-par can and will thrive.

What offends me most about Microsoft? Their irresponsibility to their customers. It is criminal.

Software supplied "As Is" without any promise of any operational performance should be free.

A guarantee from the vendor that the software does what it's makers claim is worth something per copy -> go price some engineering software like Pro Engineer, or Altium.

Selling something under the pretence it is usable for something is illegal most places, because clearly what you're doing is a con. It's part of case law, and usually is a consumer right called "Fitness for a particular purpose".

Note that it is not required to definitely guarantee that such a software product will always work under all conditions, only that it is expected by the vendor to always work, and that the vendor will take some responsibility to be determined on a case by case basis where the product may unexpectedly fail.

This is why software "support contracts" are doing so well - the software may be "open sourced" and "not certainly reliable", but it is at least "accepted practise" to run such and so most support vendors can in good faith offer such a support contract. Such a contract is a promise to fix any issues that come up as they arise, which is perfectly acceptable as the state of the art in software is advancing so rapidly.

Microsoft's present problem in the commercial sector is that is become increasingly obvious how inept they really are. Their long term plan has been to spend like crazy on research, but their failure to apply that research, and more importantly to weed out all the technically incompetent programmers they have is what is killing them.

(Which would be very difficult for them to do - as it would require a comprehensive code review of every programmer's code. A nice efficient way to do this (And, I thought obvious) would be to use a RCS in house and enable any and all programmers to access and read any and all sources.
In this way, when a programmer who is using library x notices that it has some funny undocumented behaviour, he can find out why, and complain legitimately about said behaviour.
Without access and comprehension of the source code however, it all just turns into some very dirty politics. And it is this state of internal affairs - the deflection of responsibility of the coders - that is what is strangling MS now. Unbelievably, only coders within a microsoft project group can even read that project's source code. )

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?