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!

Vista Shell Team now Blogging

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the wonder-what-they-had-for-breakfast dept.

202

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. "

cancel ×

202 comments

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

Just forget it (2, Insightful)

otacon (445694) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146549)

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 (3, Informative)

scumbaguk (918201) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146602)

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

Re:Just forget it (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146680)

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 (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146764)

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 (1, Flamebait)

Psykosys (667390) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146769)

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 (1, Funny)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146791)

The Genie effect being the first thing I turn off.

Re:Just forget it (0)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147312)

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 (2, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146784)

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 (2)

cyranthus (893560) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146882)

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

Re:Just forget it (1)

Andrzej Sawicki (921100) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146973)

Someone, somewhere coded this crap up and thought people would like it.
And many do, actually.

Re:Just forget it (2, Funny)

jo42 (227475) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147268)

Lesson to be learned here:

Never underestimate people's attraction to shiny bling.

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

Re:Just forget it (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147284)

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 (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147088)

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 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146682)

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

bash in windows? (2, Funny)

Phantom of the Opera (1867) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146747)

lets not get carried away here

Out of topic but hey (1, Offtopic)

Poltras (680608) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146917)

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 (2, Funny)

Phantom of the Opera (1867) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147273)

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:Just forget it (1)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147027)

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 (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146697)

I agree. The Eye Candy = shit!!

Try making someting Eye Straining. Og some nasty things that make my eyes sore. Try to make flickering patterns everywhere. And more aliasing on fonts and lines. In short try to make Vista look like some bad version of X Windows.

And as far as I know: Making you "Eye Candy" in Vista is real easy using shity "interfeces" like XAML and Sparkle. I think using "Pure C" is much better. Gnome does so and it sort of rocks. Of course people have been using Gnome for Eye Candy lately, with XGL and Compiz.

I don't like where things are going. So drop the Eye Candy. Please! Just because it does not cost anyting in the GPU depending Vista, doesn't make it a right. 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.

--
RedEye

Re:Just forget it (2, Interesting)

xiao_haozi (668360) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146761)

"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 (1)

misleb (129952) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147240)

"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 (2)

xiao_haozi (668360) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147339)

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 (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146814)

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 (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146863)

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 (1)

Cid Highwind (9258) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147069)

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 (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147138)

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

Re:Just forget it (1)

dan828 (753380) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147186)

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.

Shell... (1)

skogs (628589) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146554)

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... (2, Insightful)

daeg (828071) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146678)

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

Re:Shell... (1)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147310)

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.

My Internal Struggle (5, Insightful)

TrippTDF (513419) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146563)

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 (5, Insightful)

kalirion (728907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146624)

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 [boctaoe.com]

Re:My Internal Struggle (2, Funny)

pubjames (468013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146719)

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 (1)

lisaparratt (752068) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146845)

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

Re:My Internal Struggle (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146866)

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 (3, Funny)

littlem (807099) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146960)

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 (0, Flamebait)

OneoFamillion (968420) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146971)

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 (1, Offtopic)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146673)

"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 (1)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146797)

"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 (1)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146823)

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 (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147206)

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 (2, Insightful)

pubjames (468013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146698)

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 (3, Funny)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146788)

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!

A 1990s answer... (5, Informative)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146885)

...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... (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147154)

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:My Internal Struggle (1)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146950)

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.

Why? (1)

rajafarian (49150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147144)

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!

Bad name (4, Funny)

radicalskeptic (644346) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146590)

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

Re:Bad name (2, Insightful)

Ajehals (947354) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146679)

Shell Reviled

Re:Bad name (1)

Morphine007 (207082) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147226)

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... (0, Flamebait)

urbanradar (1001140) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146606)

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... (2, Informative)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146899)

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

Another Microsoft Propaganda Outlet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146608)


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 (2, Interesting)

corroncho (1003609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146641)

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 [wired.com] . 5 of my friends got theirs. Get yours here! [freepay.com]

100% correct (4, Interesting)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146689)

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

I think you mean Xgl [wikipedia.org] , 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 (1)

corroncho (1003609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146740)

Thanks for the correction. I did mean XGL.

Re:100% correct (0)

stubear (130454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146842)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146919)

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 (1)

NekSnappa (803141) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147203)

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 (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147199)

video [youtube.com]
another video [linuxedge.org]
yet another video [dailymotion.com]

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 (1)

orasio (188021) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147348)

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 (4, Interesting)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147264)

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:Eye Candy Good, Need for super computer bad (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147347)

Fuck off, you spamming asshole.

Kitchen Computer? (1, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146646)

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

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...

Out Of Order (2, Funny)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146702)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146975)

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 (1)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147023)

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 (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147127)

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"

About the picture... (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146959)

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?

Delays (0, Troll)

Ajehals (947354) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146661)

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 -

If... (2, Insightful)

UltimApe (991552) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146696)

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.

When I pay for it, just MAKE IT WORK!!! (0, Redundant)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146717)

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...

Read the EULA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146793)

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 (1)

Mistshadow2k4 (748958) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146901)

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.

Re:When I pay for it, just MAKE IT WORK!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16146799)

You're cute when you say stupid hippie shit. Can I fuck you?

Re:When I pay for it, just MAKE IT WORK!!! (1)

NullProg (70833) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146887)

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,

When I run it, just MAKE IT WORK!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147073)

"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.

WOW! (0, Offtopic)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146718)

A new blog on the Internets.

Slow news day?

OK, what were ya thinkin? (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146789)

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?

My Question (1, Interesting)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146802)

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 (1)

UltimApe (991552) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146856)

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 (1)

taskforce (866056) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147079)

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 (1)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147035)

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

I always hated it.

random response (4, Funny)

smcdow (114828) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146850)

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 (1)

bobsledbob (315580) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146870)

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

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

Excessive Requirements (1)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146875)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147076)

"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!

As Trojan's for DRM go (1)

macz (797860) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146963)

Vista sure is pretty.

The site is indicative (1)

Dracos (107777) | more than 7 years ago | (#16146974)

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.

Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly? (4, Interesting)

master_p (608214) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147010)

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? (1)

Rezonant (775417) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147111)

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...

What are you smoking? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147245)

Windows wasn't 32-bit until Win95

Re:Dear Win32 developers, why is the API so ugly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147187)

Huh?

-Win32 Programmer (for past 13 years)

Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147013)

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? (1)

multiOSfreak (551711) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147032)

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.

Blogging platform (1)

omega9 (138280) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147092)

You know, the Sharepoint team has been blogging [msdn.com] for quite some time [msdn.com] , 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 [communityserver.org] . Just look at their prices [telligent.com] .

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.

Vista - On a clear day you can see forever (1)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147190)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147196)

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

UI as important as stability and security??? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16147197)

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 [shellrevealed.com]

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

That explains *many* things.

Hmm (1)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16147300)

I have a feeling that the writer of this artical isvery biased.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>