For those interested, look ye here. Despite the title of the link, I don’t vouch for the validity of the screenshots.
I don’t know why they’re wasting effort on a 32-bit version.
It’s very pretty. Will it run on any affordable computer?
Some of the stuff in those screenshots looks like Leopard…
It’s pretty as hell, but the $64,000 question is how well does it work?
On a $64,000 computer, probably rather well.
Keep in mind that screenshots at this stage of the game have an approximately 0% match to what gets delivered.
Based on past experience. Jus’ sayin’.
Vista reached a new milestone for me the other day. For one reason or another, the only way my iMac could reach the office was in Native Vista under bootcamp (Cisco VPN wouldn’t work natively under OSX , wouldn’t work under parallels), having used it for three days straight, I can say it doesn’t suck on a $3000 workstation. I’ve moved from vehemently against it to mildly-indifferent.
All this shiny glowy transparent stuff hurts my eyes. Other than a few rounded window borders and a suspiciously familiar ‘home’ icon on the sixth screenshot, I see little that looks like OS X.
I see the docks from Tiger and Leopard in #10 and #17
And a cover-flow rip off in #8
The hand-holding continues… “You have selected Photos, Press ‘Enter’ to open”
Am I the only one who think it doesn’t look a billion miles away from Vista?
Ah, how could I have missed this before? All that Windows was missing was more transparency, and weird-ass circular menus. So simple! Apple will just go crawling back into their hole after this comes out.
Anymore, I can’t help but think that Microsoft’s primary competitor in the desktop OS world is less Apple and more Windows XP. So far, it seems to be winning.
I think someone needs to discreetly tell MS that you don’t win any cool points by being the last to do something. This is like watching your dad trying to breakdance.
I’m as interested in the guts as the glitz and I’d like to know more.
Please be respectful everyone. Many Bothans died to bring us this information.
It’s a trap!
“…You have pressed ‘Enter’ - click here to confirm”
don’t forget the little popup balloon in the bottom right saying “Mouse Click Detected”
Okay, I feel like these HAVE to be interface mock-ups and nothing more. If Microsoft really plans on having that many different modes to use windows in i’m going to kill myself. Imagine trying to support that,
Microsoft needs to learn how to deliver more functionality with less complexity instead of the other way around. Windows is really getting out of hand. It seems like it requires a lot more effort now to effect any kind of improvement than it did before.
I seriously hope they plan on making relearning where they’ve hidden all of these funcitons worth our time.
On a side note: Anyone here using Leopard? It has this cool feature, that I think really ought to integrated more into computers, as things get more and more complex. Did you notice that in Leopard, you can search the menus through help? It’s a simple thing really, but I actually use it a lot in Photoshop. There are so many menu options and I forget where to look for things at times, so it’s easier. This really ought to be the future of computing. Why search through menus or what-have-you to find a feature when you ought to just be able to search for it?
I’ve described the problem like this:
In 1990, you had a word processor with 200 features and used 60 of them.
In 1995, your wordprocessor had 2000 features. You used 100 of them.
In 2000, your wordprocessor has 2800 features. You used 105 of them.
In 2008, your wordprocessor has 3400 features(!), You use 80 of them. (you decide you don’t need Mail Merge, Clippy, or any fonts other than Arial and Times New Roman)
You really haven’t needed to buy a new wordprocessor since 1995, but Microsoft still needs to sell word processors to keep the profits up. The best they can come up with is COMPLETELY altering the menu structure, and hiding everything from the File menu (which had been consistent for 15 years) under a gumdrop circle button in the upper lefthand corner.
They’re also SO big that internal politics dictates a mentally unstable self-image. While there are multiple scripting engines in the world (perl, bash, etc.), I can think of AT LEAST four from Microsoft alone (Cscript, Wscript, vbscript, Monad/PowerShell…)
Further, Microsoft MARKETING is a cancerous tumor that hopes you’ll forget it’s there if it keeps changing things quickly enough. An introductiory paragraph describing Portal Server, and programming for it consisted of nothing more than: Portal Server (once called Foo Server Pro) uses inter-process communication (called ActiveFoo, now called FooLive) and ubermailboxbin (called DActiveFooterbater, now called ProPlanPlus), and an underlying glue (Fubertron, now Excellex with more iron!)
Having been away from Portal Server for two years, I found every single aspect of the application had changed, and if I hadn’t been drinking the koolaid every single day, I had no chance of keeping up with where they’d taken it.
I needed to have an online form…that had to be accessible to everyone, and Portal Server ‘fully supported’ all browsers and users. Except if they wanted to fill out a form. THEN they needed IE6 or greater, and a ‘Portal Server Aware’ application (read: Office) Microsoft’s insistence in having a hook in every process meant we went to a different product to accomplish our tasks.
COOL!
I never knew about that!
I wanna know how the heck they’re numbering their versions! Not counting Windows CE, Server, and other “nonstandard” versions:
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows ME
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Vista
That’s 6 versions since 3.1. How come now we’re only up to 7?
Really, I wish they’d stick with either X.X numbering or 200X numbering (my preference, because it reminds one how old the thing is).