Comments on: Sidebar on display in next Vista preview

February's preview version of Windows update to include a panel housing mini applications.
Images: Dashboards and widgets

[Zymurgist]

Is it compatible with the Mac widgets?

The Linux equivalent is. Presumably it's not too
different (though probably bound to one XML
dialect rather than have multiple bindings).

[Earl Benser]

Probably not with the OS X Widgets....

... But another set, PC compatible, is available from Yahoo. They are
the old Konfabulator series with a new version, and new Widgets.
There is also an OS X version so everyone gets to play.

[frankwick]

OS/2 sidebar

The original? http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/os221/od_fold.gif

[katamari]

OS/2, hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Don't worry, the future's still in OS/2! *Really*.

[dlapham]

Sounds like Google Sidebar

Microsoft is so orignal these days. I have a wide screen display and use google desktop. I don't see how this is any diffferent other than being Microsoft branded..

[t8]

Microsofts business plan

Do what Google does.

[sidewinder]

pay attention

The sidebar was origionally in windows longhorn circa 2002/3, MS did it before google

[bobby_brady]

Yawn!

More eye candy from Softie!

[Sampsonite0]

Hmm.... A "sidebar" on the display...

How innovative it is. How original it is. How much like Apple's
Dock/Dashboard it is.

[sidewinder]

Widgets

Because you know apple didn't copy the concept for Konfab which didn't copy the concept from DesktopX

[blaineg]

get over it

How much should you care if you use mac and aren't going to use Vista anyway?

[marc_90292]

Sidebar

I am not sure I need that. In fact, instead of implementing such features, why does MS not use its resources to fix the myriad of bugs it has allowed for years to flourish?

[David Arbogast]

So?

The article did not say that no bugs were fixed. Of course bugs have been fixed. And, I'm not surprised that you "aren't sure" if you can use the sidebar... Remember that Linux responds to the demans of users, who must first see or use a feature elsewhere before demanding in in Linux. Microsoft and other OS companies actually try to anticipate the needs of users. Don't want it? Don't use it. Clearly, MS had the opportunity to evaluate the value of such a feature by looking at other systems that have been released more recently than XP. Have you used OS/X?

[katamari]

Completely agree.

Because their hope is that by "innovating" and "releasing new synergetic products marketed at the dynamic recooperating market schmoozelkekekekeke" that we'll forget about all the bugs in Windows which they've had *over 10 years to fix*.

There are still bugs in XP which existed in Windows 95. There's zero interest to fix them; instead, the focus will be on Vista. And with Vista, I bet we'll see a whole new set of bugs which will never get fixed, rinse lather repeat...

Simple answer

> why does MS not use its resources to fix the myriad of bugs it has allowed for years to flourish?

Because
1) Bug fixes usually come in service packs.
2) New features, in new OS versions.

What piece of software do users pay for?

[Pascoli]

bugs

you find is hard to believe, but ms actually produces better quality code than many others in the industry. Also number of exploits is not necessarily corelated to numbers of bugs, or flaws. in case you haven't noticed, apple as well as all software vendors issue fixes regulary, manitimes even for critical flaws. it just that they don't get exploited, whether because the target size is not that big, or for *nixes for instance, the users are well educated and follows safe computing pratices that would mitigate if not stop any potential attack. you may actualy give some credit to ms. since winxp sp2, exploits and attacks are becoming more prevalent on other common software: winamp, apple quicktime, realplayer, norton av,...and the list goes on. bug simply can never be totaly eliminated from code, that is as long as it's done by humans, IMO.

[Betty Roper]

The WMF vulnerability

And probably others that haven't been exploited. Yet.

[Azio]

Nice

So basically you don't actually have an example of a known bug that was in Windows 95, is still in XP, and that Microsoft has "no interest" in fixing. Basically you're full of **** and you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for trying, though.

[Maccess]

Vista preview

Here's a sight with a tongue in cheek preview of the "NEW" features of Windows Vista

http://tauquil.com/archives/2006/01/06/re-introducing-the-real-windows-vista/

[jzsaxpc]

It looks like XP

WEll, personaly, I was looking forward to something that didn't look like windows 95, but I was sad to see that it looks the same, the same graphical idea.

[krusty283]

Wow!!

Oh my word. IE 7 beta is going to have tabs and now semi-
translucent "Gadgets" to be included in Vista ... whenever it gets
released. I cannot fathom how Microsoft became the huge
company they are. They have a long history of taking other
people's concepts, implementing them WORSE than what they are
trying to knock-off, and doing it years behind the curve. We're now
in the 6th cursed year of XP and even the future, in-the-pipe stuff
from M$ is a bigger yawn than what has already been available on
other platforms for years.

[microsoft slayer]

I'm getting a MacBook Pro

No longer do I have to deal with crappy winbloze asta la vista.

[Tanjore]

Why microsoft is successful?

1) Mac => Lock in to a single hardware vendor.
Excellent OS. 20 to 30% Expensive to
own.

2) Unix => MultiVendor Expensive Hardware,
Expensive OS. Not easy for a common
user.

3) Linux => Multivendor, many diff processors,
poor games support. Still not easy
and seemless for a common user.

4) Windows => Multivendor, cheap hardware, good
game support. Issues with
Virus,spyware and malware. Issues
can be mitigated with keeping up
with the updates. Most users
need to buy os (Redhat or suse).
Cost of these vendor supported
linux is almost same as windows.

Corporations chose multivendor pcs for whatever business reason (may be microsoft marketing or lack of altenatives or even stupidity). For corporations to migrate to any new platform involves spending ton of money and lots of risks. It is a slow process.

Microsoft always provided a consistent support to corporations. Info executives microsoft probably thought 'well I don't like microsoft but, atleast it will not go belly up'. Corporations have also learnt to tame the issues with Windows OS.

Just my two cents.

Desktop Sidebar

Desktop Sidebar have done this for years, even before Google Desktop: http://www.desktopsidebar.com/

[Sbvmax]

Free Desktop Sidebar

I've been using this program for awhile now and so far I really like it and haven't found any problems with it. I only use it about once a week since then all I do is read up on all the new technology news and gossip and then don't get anything done. It also can give you %'s on CPU usage, Disk Usage, Memory Usage, Swap File and Net work quick stats. Then I beleive top 2 programs that are currently using the most resources every second.

www.desktopsidebar.com

Freeware

[Earl Benser]

One fault....

... you have to use IE to get it.

[microsoft slayer]

Windows Vista is a copycat version

of Mac OS X. Sidebar my ass...it's called a dock.

[Bobman]

completely different

the purpose of the dock and the purpose of the sidebar are almost completely different. the Windows equivalent of the dock happens to be the taskbar

[assman]

holy hell cant they do ANYTHING original?!!

basicly, microsoft is producing "Tiger XP - Crap Version For Windows". seriously, they've attempted to copy every aspect of the mac os x because apple innovates while microsoft modifies (their competitors superior products)

and here they are yet again, they settle for a dumbed down version of apple's ingenious concept. even down to the specifics: widgets that blend with their background becomes "gadgets"(of course it sounds uglier, you didnt expect msft to come up with a good name did u?), they are going to be downloadable, they show on darkened translucent area, they float above your desktop, they are written using javascript, they use png graphics..

and yet, they dont manage to replicate. apple's solution remains much better and more useful and of course, more user friendly. and, apple's dashboard doesnt get in the way of your work.

comon microsoft, put your 100,000 employees and billions of dollars to real use.

[Tanjore]

Widgets are not mac's oirginal idea either

Apple stole dashboard/widgets idea from a small company called konfabulator (now owned by yahoo).

In software terms you only steal if you have a patent!!!

If you don't have a patent then you have not stolen it. You just made it popular using someones idea.

When it comes to idea stealing Apple and microsoft are in the same boat!!!

GUI innovation - XEROX
Eternet innovation - XEROX
Networking/internet - DARPA
OS x - BSD unix!! - Darwin Project
PC - Concept - XEROX!!

Apple killed lot of companies that provided niche products to Apple OS (Mac Os etc).

Apple's credit is making it appealing.

Pointcast anyone?

Is it just me, or does this sound a little bit like a warmed over version of Pointcast? OK, granted, Pointcast went boom when the bubble burst (if not before), but its another attempt at utilizing the failed idea of pushing information to the desktop. People like to surf, not the other way around.

[electorny]

Ahh the Old Dashboard of Old

Which comes to my mind in the old Windows 3.1 which was an add on. Pointcast was an additional web site program. As things progress how we seem to return to them. Many computer companies made simular programs which did most of the same functions. Multi-casting or multi-tasking is not new, but old technology.

[Christopher Hall]

Am I the only one who hates this?

There are EXACTLY two things on my desktop. One is the taskbar and the other is the recycle bin. I don't want this trash cluttering up my screen. Why are they so excited about this thing?

[The Cubelodyte]

Nope.

I don't care for it either. I generally don't like anything that robs me
of screen real estate (though I realize you don't have to have the
sidebar as the topmost layer). I vastly prefer the OS X Dashboard
implementation to the unimaginative Sidebar.

Having said that, though, Sidebar *does* do one thing that
Dashboard doesn't, and that I wish it would- the ability to move a
"gadget" from the Sidebar and onto the Desktop. I have two
Dashboard widgets I'd like to be able to do that with.

[Zymurgist]

There are times where it's useful...

I've a position where I need to monitor a
compute cluster from my Linux workstation, so I
do maintain a desktop session that, besides
having handy links to the cluster management
console, a root console for the cluster, and
some other tools, there are a number of monitors
implemented as widgets that report the state of
the cluster environment.

It's nice to have them inconspicuously adorning
the desktop so that I can simply switch to it to
get a quick view of what's happening. Rather
than a dozen applications reporting various
things, its a simple arrangement of desktop
widgets. The task bar is clean, window layout
doesn't take them into account, etc. Mind you,
though, I don't keep it running in my regular
working desktop session.

[angrykeyboarder]

Because people like it....

The same type of stuff has been available for
Linux desktops for several years. it's very
popular.

Some people like their desktops cluttered and
some (like you and I) like them lean and mean.

Frankly I'd like to get the Recycle Bin off the
Windows Desktop too (and put it on the taskbar
(as the "Trash" is in KDE and OSX).

There is no need for any icons on the desktop.
It's really an inefficient place to put them.
Why? Because most of the time you need them, you
have to minimize at least one window to get to
them. They belong on launchers, docks or menus,
not on the desktop.

The sidebar isn't a bad idea, if you really feel
you need it. I don't and I'm sure it will be
optional (or easily turned off anyway).

[frankwick]

OSX

how do they copy exactly? MS announced and demoed a sidebar concept way before Tiger (or whatever it is called) was released itno the wild. MS did not implement because they were still pushing XP and the sidebar was a Longhorn trick.

Seriously, I like OSX, but some you apple fan boys get clouded judgment and do whatever it takes to bash MS.

[Charleston Charge]

Let's face it

The majority of features included in OSX and Windows were not invented by Apple or MS but by smaller companies and universities. Whenever either of these companies adds a new feature, fan boys from both sides come out flaming over which company did it first and the answer is usually neither.

[paulsecic]

OsX

OSX is more like Windows. I loved Mac OS8. Apple ruined the Mac.

[System Tyrant]

Well it sure is pretty....

but how does it run?

[mgreere]

Apple dude is designing Vista interface

Funny... I recall reading about a former Apple designer (he may
have designed the titanium powerbooks) who was hired by MS to
make Vista look stylish -- redo the windows, add the alpha effects,
etc. If you're less lazy than I am, you can probably find a the story.

[Maccess]

Capps et al, have been in MS for a while

Much of the design work of Windows is done by people who have also done the design work for Apple.

Steve Capps (inner workings of the GUI), Susan Kare (Windows icons)all did the same work for Apple.

What's scary is that Apple has figured out that all those simultaneously multi-tasking "features" really need the genuine multi-threaded, multi-tasking core of Unix, while Windows just keeps on adding this stuff to an already overextended monolithic core.

[Thomas, David]

To Everyone Here

Truth be told, if MS hadn't spent so much effort in presenting Vista as "for the first time", "innovative", "prototype built for them", etc. ... in other words, acting as if they created "it", and did "it" first ... then we wouldn't be arguing and picking sides.

Our banter, and bickering is a direct result from this type of marketing. Especially when personal computer users have all of these capabilities now, and are using them in other operating systems.

The people who are inflamed by Microsofts ingenious presentations, are those who use these systems daily, and are trying to figure out what the heck is new about Vista.

All of us, and yes, even those of you who are dedicated to Microsoft, dearly want/need them to fix their current problems and quit dumping them on us. We don't even get enough time to develop, and use a Microsoft system long enough before they break something, or replace something with new bugs, then impose more costs on us to keep pace. Which is why I and many others use multiple systems.

While Linux, Unix, MacOS, OSX have had updates as well, they are not as often, nor have such a negative impact as Microsofts constant releases and upgrades have incurred on us. Yeah, simple solution, don't use them. Guess what, it is not that simple, as that would require Corporations, Government agencies, home users, to simultaneously to quit using their products. Nor do I advocate that, as much as I am not a Microsoft fan.

The responsibility is Microsofts to do a better job, as requested by its customers (on a constant basis), and quit being deaf, dumb, and blind to the obvious. With a few less bugs, most of us would simply shut up.

[Pascoli]

Where have you been hiding?

apple is the one that pops an os every year or so. i mean do you remember when os x came out? apple is at something like the fourth itteration of it. win xp however has not seen an update for close to five years now. i can you say this in good faith about ms?

[solarflair]

shorthorn/ windoze visa or vista

What a joke, shorthorn does nothing but steal there ideas from linux and other nix systems. Windows will never be stable because of its poor design. IE7 will be no better than anyother version of MS because they continue to build into there core componets of the kernel. Fedora is a bleeding-edge distro, but I get patches ASAP. SP2 is still a warehouse for viruses, rootkits, spyware and adware.