A limited vista on Windows 7
Some purported screenshots from a new build of Windows 7 have Microsoft watchers ruminating on the forthcoming version of the operating system and the company's take that the less said, the better.
The blog ThinkNext.net has posted a large set of screenshots that it says represent Windows 7 M3 Build 6780, from the start menu and the control panel to the media player and (how could they skip this one?) the error page. Wording on the post is terse, to say the least--the screen images are there for you to behold and for you to make of them what you will.
ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley, who has seen Build 6780, reports that the leaked screenshots are "something about which neither Microsoft nor some of its testers seem very happy." And from there she goes on to contemplate whether Redmond's zipped-lip policy on the features and functions of Windows 7 is a wise one for the company and its beta testers.
If Microsoft does end up providing early Windows 7 bits to attendees of its upcoming Professional Developers Conference and/or Windows Hardware Engineering Conference, I'll be interested to see what the terms and conditions will be on these builds. Will testers be allowed to talk about what they get? Or be bound by non-disclosure agreements? I'll also be interested to see how much Windows 7 changes between these latest M3 builds and Beta 1 in December.
Top Windows folks at Microsoft have said that the Professional Developers Conference in late October and WinHEC the following week are "the first venues where we will provide in-depth technical information about Windows 7." They've also said that Windows 7 will follow the Windows Vista kernel approach and driver model, and will incorporate the company's multitouch interface.
At the Technologizer blog, meanwhile, Harry McCracken gives an overview of Microsoft's nonpublicity efforts on Windows 7, against the backdrop of the verbiage that preceded the launch of Windows Vista. "For now," he says, "the quieter, humbler, more disciplined Microsoft is kind of refreshing."
He also offers a few observations on what we can glean from the screenshots shown at ThinkNext: "None of the stuff you can glimpse in the screens seems to represent any radical rethinking of the Windows interface." The particulars of the purported Build 6780, per McCracken, don't exactly take the breath away: " A fancier calculator (woo hoo!)", for instance, and the appearance of "Office 2007's Ribbon interface in WordPad and Paint (I'm a fan of the Ribbon, but I hope this isn't among Seven's major breakthroughs)."
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has targeted late 2009 for release of the new version of the operating system.
Jonathan Skillings is managing editor of CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. He's been with CNET since 2000, after a decade in tech journalism at the IDG News Service, PC Week, and an AS/400 magazine. He's also been a soldier and a schoolteacher. E-mail Jon. 
i mean, i like vista... just make it lighter, please?
Now, that said..... Vista IS, even taking that into account, a little heavy on the memory.... but only a very little.
So it is taking memory away from apps that are running just to save you a few milliseconds on the off chance that they guessed right?
If that is light, you must live on Jupiter.
Oh, I am sure that there will be some fixes in there, but nothing that shouldn;t have come out as a service pack for Vista.
When people think "new OS", they are looking for radical new functionality. This just doesn't look like it will pass that test.
As for new functionality. Well MS already told us what that'll be. Super duper multi-touch and a few apps that go along with that like a new virtual on screen keyboard and new image viewers that let you stretch and flip the images and stuff like that. Yeah I know, totally gay.
Jim also has a point: Vista was more an incremental upgrade on it's face.... until you realized that it was totally rewritten to make virus attacks and malware attacks harder, if not damn near impossible if people are careful with their systems.
Malware can look like video codecs, trojans that gets downloaded from your inbox, malware that snuck in when you installed a pirated piece of software, and malware that tells you it's anti-malware. In other words, the user installed these things on purpose because they think the malware is actually useful software. No operating system can protect that user. Also, a virus doesn't always need special permission or access to system files to give you a headache. It might not trip UAC in some cases.
The other types of attacks are web based like phishing, XSS, cookie hijacks, and what not. The OS itself couldn't protect you from those if it wanted to. So, even if the security features did work they wouldn't really work. The attitude that one OS is more secure than another is exactly the attitude you should have if you want to get infected.
So really you're just left with an OS that uses too many video resources. Sure is pretty though isn't it? Besides, if you were really worried about security you'd be using Linux or BSD.
There is a flaw in its heap implementation that allows anyone the ability to permanently get around the cosmetic memory protection scheme. That means everything MS boasted about in regards to security is already moot.
AKA Vista is as exploitable as XP.
I don't understand it, because I have NEVER had an update 'break' a program. Period and done with, never had that happen, as long as it was a Windows Update downloaded update.
That's the main reason why it just isn't turned on by default.
As to the anti-phishing thing..... TURN IT ON! It's meant to protect your computer by giving you warning as to whether you are on a known phishing page or not. If something is messing with that and it isn't security software (Norton replaces this function with their OWN phishing filter, which is better, in my opinion)... you have something bad on your system.
As to the 'babysitting users'..... most users want to be babysitted by Microsoft and gripe, moan and groan if they aren't and they break something, no matter how clear Microsoft was that they shouldn't touch a file in question.
I'd like to use Windows again just because of it's application selection is more diverse, but I'm not about to stick with XP as a primary OS just because I like some 3rd party apps. Sure, it's solid, but it's 7 years old. As for Vista, it just feels awkward and I can't justify shelling out the cash for a license (don't get me started on how bad the licensing is...).
A few tips for Microsoft from a casual OS visitor.
1) Keep refining while still improving functionality.
2) Avoid huge UI changes this release cycle.
3) Give us the ability to truly tweak the AI (transparency settings, color setting etc).
4) Update the core, bundled apps. You're competing with Apple and the Linux distros. They all provide actively developed applications that keep up with the times. When you've got GIMP being bundled with Linux, why has MSPaint been ignored since 1995 basically.
5) Only a few SKUs, and make differences clear. 1 for netbooks and the like that's lightwight but also a little feature light. One for basic home functionality to be placed on those $400 complete systems. One for full home functionality that offers maybe even Word and Media Center, and finally a Business version that doesn't have all the entertainment options, but comes with business software pre-loaded.
As to the 'huge UI changes'.... there wasn't any change from XP really! It's pretty much the same as XP except for different icons. That's it as to how the UI changed, besides Network Home.
As to the "Truly tweak the AI".... Vista has all those functions you mentioned. It's under the Appearance and Personalization button in Control Panel.
Update the core bundled apps? Really, I think that they should make them optional while having them be updateable. The reason MSPaint has been ignored: if Microsoft made it better, the regulators would be howling down their necks about "You are trying to put Adobe out of business!" or some other BS.
The SKU thing? Really, I would like to see a VERY lightweight version of Vista for all computers. One that doesn't install ANY drivers on your machine unless you specifically have the piece of hardware that they are for. One that doesn't install all the services or allows you to tell them what you will be doing with the computer, and then it intelligently decides which services to enable and disable, freeing up memory.
Really, most of the 'bloat' of Windows XP and Vista is the damn drivers for 10 year old software that they still have to include because some people have not gotten with the times, bit the bullet and upgraded their hardware. If people would update every 5 years, like I do (printers, mice, etc. get updated or replaced every 6, 3 and 5 years, respectively), Vista wouldn't be so bloated anymore.
The reason that I refuse to buy Vista is the DRM introduced and the fact that it is a fat resource hog that requires 2 Gigabytes of RAM to run at half the speed of XP (in part due to the DRM)!
Unless these two issues are resolved, I will NOT buy Windows Vista, Windows 7 or any other future version. Period. I don't care how many user interface improvements are made.
Scroll arrows are not subconsciously obvious. They were in Xp and previous versions.
Design has failed by taking form itself ahead of function.
Translucency? Too much. Overkill. Even in Mac OS X 10.5.2 (now 10.5.5) Apple returned to users an option to turn off the translucent menu bar. (and a good many have turned it off)
It all looks like Gnome skinned by a very eager kid.
I will never buy another Apple ever again. They jerk you around way too much for repairs.
Apple: Go into the Apple store. Hand your computer over to them. It sits on a shelf until they get to it because there is a line. Meanwhile you are SOL when it comes to a computer. 1 week. Apple had my laptop 1 week to replace a fracking optical drive that takes 30-40 minutes to replace
Dell: A tech calls you up to sched an appointment to come out and replace the part. You can even sched an appointment at your workplace. They are pretty flexable. Typically turn around is NBD, assuming you picked up NBD warranty which is the same or less then Apple's Apple Care.
Nope. Seriously. I like Apple's OS. Screw their hardware and warranty policies.
That is par for the course for any computer repair shop, which is why it pays to be able to repair your own system.
is not equal to
"Dell: A tech calls you up to sched an appointment to come out and replace the part. You can even sched an appointment at your workplace. They are pretty flexable."
Oh but that's right being from Apple makes it the same because...you say so.
I am more in line with what Apple appears to be doing with the Leopard to Snow Leopard transition. Take a deep breath, optimize absolutely everything for performance, and shrink the footprint.
I don't get the impression that MS is doing this. Rather, they appear to be going business as usual, building more layers of bloat, and increasing the hardware requirements to run it.
What they need to be doing is building an OS from scratch. Contrary to popular belief Vista is built on the same rotting foundation that MS has been using for years. Some GUI tweaks and some cosmetic security speed bumps do not constitute new.
Really? I've been hearing about Apple giving us a "new OS" every 18-24 months, and yet we haven't seen "radical new functionality" or even a new interface since tired-old OS X 10.0 came out. It's basically been nothing but 5 service packs since then. Where's OS 11 already?
I've had 0 freezes, BSOD, nothing. Not a single hitch. Maybe if the world stopped running their Vista box on a Commodore we'd all be okay.
As for translucency? Turn it off, it's an option, it's true. Same as UAC.
Windows 7 will be an upgrade. I don't recall 95 and 98 (or 2000) looking radically different, or any version of Apple OS in the past 6 years, so.
It'll be a welcome change. Hopefully the Apple cult advertising chain can't ruin another useful product, as much as the ignorant world of computer users who sit on XP reviewing Vista would like it to.
The amount of vista owner that come to my repair shop with Vista's problems is huge compared to those who are happy, blissful with Vista. Vista doesn't freeze, a big lie!, Vista doesn't crash, a huge lie, Vista is reliable, another piece of b****, Vista is compatible, user-friendly, then ask my older customer what they think about it... Ever seen Vista go on it's track, all alone "off road", like XP used to do until it got fixed enough, which made people say -" it seems my machine has a life of it's own".
Have you ever clicked on a link, a shortcut and having to wait for ages until Mr. Vista finally says yes, err what? ah yes you want word or this folder.
Ever tried to fix a network problem caused by Vista introduced in it... Ever tried to correct a Vista registry screewd up... Vista is nothing but a costly nightmare for the customer who has to pay for the repairs...!!!
Vista is a draggy slow hogg, I'm fixing it and I can tell. I'm not using Vista, but Win98, Win2k +XP and Linux. Vista is banned from my network. It's a shame that a company like MS, with the potential they have is only able ot produce such piece of****.
I truly think that the hardware potential we can enjoy nowadays deserves a far better OS then Vista.
Simple, run an XP or a Linux distro on a 2 Gigas dualcore with 1GB ram and you'll beat any Vista running on a 3.4 GB dualcore with 3Gb ram, doing the same job. Question, how much energy , (KWatts) has a Vista spent at he end of the yearcompared with an XP, etc doing the same jobs. If you can imagine CPU is +/- a 90 to 140 Watts lightbulb, + a few more Watts for the rest of the hardware, you can understand where I'm getting to.
The End
- Only two versions, Enterprise and everyone else. The way Vista is broken into so many flavors only causes confusion and a huge amount of backlash. For me, it is the right behind application compatability and UAC for reasons not to move to Vista. Too many headaches, too many times I need to workaround missing functionality.
- Reduce the memory footprint!
- Add real preemptive muliti tasking.
- When I close a window, in general it should close in less than 2 seconds. It should always return control to me immediately.
- Make every error dialogue include the application / driver / hardware name involved in the problem.
- Fix all the ribbons to have a consistent set of actions.
i.e. In Excel, there is about a quarter of the options as Word for 'cut, copy paste" when it should be practically the same!
- Spend more time on the underpinnnings, MUCH less on the make it pretty.
- If it cannot be configured from the command prompt, you are not done with your engineering. GUIs are for end users, not systems mangement.
- Readable and usable documentation. I don't write programs for a living!
- There is no reason I should not be able to control any aspect of the appearance. This includes the logon background! Personally I have great difficulty with white text on a bright busy background. The ability to use plain high contrasting background and color scheme is a basic necessity.
Easy, ask those who say they're happy with Vista what hardware power are they running on. Most of my customers come in with machines that seem to have big nice number, but not so much in the end , and half of the machines came with "Vista Ready", "Vista Capable" and then Comes the Vista... guess? ... Basic! which is less in my opinion then XP Home. In my years of experience I never had a single new XP Home not able to play a simple DVD movie but I can't count the Vista Basic that can't !!!
So to those who are happy I'd say, just be happy, you are some of the lucky, very lucky one. But please let those who aren't say so, it's not just bashing away. No.
The amount of vista owner that come to my repair shop with Vista's problems is huge compared to those who are happy, blissful with Vista. Vista doesn't freeze, a big lie!, Vista doesn't crash, a huge lie, Vista is reliable, another piece of b****, Vista is compatible, user-friendly, then ask my older customer what they think about it... Ever seen Vista go on it's track, all alone "off road", like XP used to do until it got fixed enough, which made people say -" it seems my machine has a life of it's own".
Have you ever clicked on a link, a shortcut and having to wait for ages until Mr. Vista finally says: yes, err what? ah yes you wanted word or this folder.
Ever tried to fix a network problem caused by Vista introduced in it... Ever tried to correct a Vista registry screewd up... Vista is nothing but a costly nightmare for the customer who has to pay for the repairs...!!!
Vista is a draggy slow hogg, I'm fixing it and I can tell. I'm not using Vista, but Win98, Win2k +XP and Linux, basically loads of repair tools. Vista is banned from my network. It's a shame that a company like MS, with the potential they have is only able ot produce such piece of****.
I truly think that the hardware potential we can enjoy nowadays deserves a far better OS then Vista.
Simple, run an XP or a Linux distro on a 2 Gigas dualcore with 1GB ram and you'll beat any Vista running on a 3.4 GB dualcore with 3Gb ram, doing the same job. Question, how much energy , (KWatts) has a Vista spent at he end of the yearcompared with an XP, etc doing the same jobs. If you can imagine CPU is +/- a 90 to 140 Watts lightbulb, + a few more Watts for the rest of the hardware, you can understand where I'm getting to.
The End
- by datamike September 23, 2008 2:50 PM PDT
- Just like Windows Me was the "stop-gap" between Windows 98 and Windows XP so it goes with Vista. Vista is the same sorta stop-gap between XP and 7. The real OS they planned all along. Do they think we don't notice? We might as well call Vista VistaMe huh? Think about it. The Operating System code is so huge that no one can come up with a "new" operating system inside the 2-3 year Microsoft OS life cycle. The BIG changes in code occur every 3-4 years. Or about when the REAL new generation of hardware has taken commercial hold. But that's just my opinion.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (47 Comments)