Windows 7 is coming...

[stash]

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yeah, it seems a little odd at first, but hovering over the icon immediately shows you thumbnails of each window with gasp...text above them! Its still the same amount of clicks to change to any window from the taskbar (one). The route to that click might be *slightly* more circuitous, but the actual window youre looking for (especially if you have a lot open) should be much easier to find amongst many.

Plus, the demo of Peek showed that if you have two Word docs open and you can't figure out which one you want (because the titles are something like Document1 and Document2), hovering over the taskbar thumbnail will bring that window to the foreground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipg6ltIZRw0

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: stash

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yeah, it seems a little odd at first, but hovering over the icon immediately shows you thumbnails of each window with gasp...text above them! Its still the same amount of clicks to change to any window from the taskbar (one). The route to that click might be *slightly* more circuitous, but the actual window youre looking for (especially if you have a lot open) should be much easier to find amongst many.

Plus, the demo of Peek showed that if you have two Word docs open and you can't figure out which one you want (because the titles are something like Document1 and Document2), hovering over the taskbar thumbnail will bring that window to the foreground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipg6ltIZRw0

Yep, its pretty neat. I personally dont keep that many windows open in the first place, but part of the reason why is that its so hard to keep track of them once the taskbar clutters up.

Even though I think its quite good, I'm kinda glad vista has such a bad reputation. If that wasnt the case, they probably wouldnt be working as hard on Win7 (especially the performance). I think the threat of linux, on netbooks especially, is really making them sweat, and competition is always a good thing.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yep, its pretty neat. I personally dont keep that many windows open in the first place, but part of the reason why is that its so hard to keep track of them once the taskbar clutters up.

Even though I think its quite good, I'm kinda glad vista has such a bad reputation. If that wasnt the case, they probably wouldnt be working as hard on Win7 (especially the performance). I think the threat of linux, on netbooks especially, is really making them sweat, and competition is always a good thing.

That is the number one reason why I love both Linux and Apple's OSX (Let's also add Firefox to this mix). The competition they provide has forced Microsoft to quit sitting on their asses and start looking to provide a better end user experience on Windows.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

Looks like text can be enabled on the new taskbar.

 

[RebateMonger]

One observation that was suggested by a Prodigy poster about fifteen years ago and continues to be true:

Programmers continue to use ALL the desktop space to run their applications. Even as screens have gone from 640x480 to 800x600 to 1024x768 to 1280x1024 to 1600x1200 and above, it STILL takes a full screen to work on an MS Word document and most other applications.

With touchscreens, the human interface is going to get even BIGGER so it can be controlled by clumsy fingers. An Excel 2007 spreadsheet now has seven rows of title, icon, and status bars by default. And those rows are going to have to be much bigger to work with touchscreens. With usable touchscreen menus and icons, Excel plus Windows will likely be devoting one-quater of a 20-inch LCD screen just for the menu and control system.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yep, its pretty neat. I personally dont keep that many windows open in the first place, but part of the reason why is that its so hard to keep track of them once the taskbar clutters up.

Even though I think its quite good, I'm kinda glad vista has such a bad reputation. If that wasnt the case, they probably wouldnt be working as hard on Win7 (especially the performance). I think the threat of linux, on netbooks especially, is really making them sweat, and competition is always a good thing.

That is the number one reason why I love both Linux and Apple's OSX (Let's also add Firefox to this mix). The competition they provide has forced Microsoft to quit sitting on their asses and start looking to provide a better end user experience on Windows.

Competition pushes everyone along. The browser space has become interesting again, what with an actual emphasis on performance and compliance instead of plugins and tabs.

Both Microsoft and Apple are working on their next OSes with a larger focus on speed and reliability, but I think Apple has a bit of a headstart when you consider that the OS is, arguably, more stable to begin with, and they have a much, much smaller install base to worry about.

What I really wish Microsoft would do is just abandon Windows. Start fresh, and come out with a completely new codebase. Make sure everyone is clear that this is a new OS, that your older software will not work with it. To make transistion easier, something akin to Classic on OS X could be implemented, where it emulates the old OS within the new one. Then, after enough revisions (the problem here being Microsoft's slower compared to the competition development cycle) you just phase out Classic. (Which was in OS 10.0-10.4[PPC], once the Intel Macs came out, Classic was removed from Intel 10.4 and is not available at all in 10.5)

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Rhonda the Sly
Looks like http://www.istartedsomething.c...-new-superbar-taskbar/">text</a> can be enabled on the new taskbar.

Interesting. When you make the icons small and add the text it seems to really take on the appearance of the old taskbar, even if the functionality is quite different.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: TheStu
Competition pushes everyone along. The browser space has become interesting again, what with an actual emphasis on performance and compliance instead of plugins and tabs.

Both Microsoft and Apple are working on their next OSes with a larger focus on speed and reliability, but I think Apple has a bit of a headstart when you consider that the OS is, arguably, more stable to begin with, and they have a much, much smaller install base to worry about.

What I really wish Microsoft would do is just abandon Windows. Start fresh, and come out with a completely new codebase. Make sure everyone is clear that this is a new OS, that your older software will not work with it. To make transistion easier, something akin to Classic on OS X could be implemented, where it emulates the old OS within the new one. Then, after enough revisions (the problem here being Microsoft's slower compared to the competition development cycle) you just phase out Classic. (Which was in OS 10.0-10.4[PPC], once the Intel Macs came out, Classic was removed from Intel 10.4 and is not available at all in 10.5)

Actually, from what I have read and understand from reading Mary Jo Foley's blog at ZDNet, is Microsoft is actually working a completely new OS to replace Windows with. From what she says from her sources inside Microsoft, it will be at least five years before this new platform sees light and even then Windows will continue to be developed along side it for a number of years. This is pretty much the same thing Microsoft did with both the 9x and NT code bases for a number of years.

I will look up the link to the blog posting later when I get back from walking the dog. Jack Russell Terriers are demanding little shits.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: TheStu

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: BD2003
Yep, its pretty neat. I personally dont keep that many windows open in the first place, but part of the reason why is that its so hard to keep track of them once the taskbar clutters up.

Even though I think its quite good, I'm kinda glad vista has such a bad reputation. If that wasnt the case, they probably wouldnt be working as hard on Win7 (especially the performance). I think the threat of linux, on netbooks especially, is really making them sweat, and competition is always a good thing.

That is the number one reason why I love both Linux and Apple's OSX (Let's also add Firefox to this mix). The competition they provide has forced Microsoft to quit sitting on their asses and start looking to provide a better end user experience on Windows.

Competition pushes everyone along. The browser space has become interesting again, what with an actual emphasis on performance and compliance instead of plugins and tabs.

Both Microsoft and Apple are working on their next OSes with a larger focus on speed and reliability, but I think Apple has a bit of a headstart when you consider that the OS is, arguably, more stable to begin with, and they have a much, much smaller install base to worry about.

What I really wish Microsoft would do is just abandon Windows. Start fresh, and come out with a completely new codebase. Make sure everyone is clear that this is a new OS, that your older software will not work with it. To make transistion easier, something akin to Classic on OS X could be implemented, where it emulates the old OS within the new one. Then, after enough revisions (the problem here being Microsoft's slower compared to the competition development cycle) you just phase out Classic. (Which was in OS 10.0-10.4[PPC], once the Intel Macs came out, Classic was removed from Intel 10.4 and is not available at all in 10.5)

You know, I was saying the same thing for a while, but after seeing what they were able to do with the interface to Windows 7 (and Vista to a lesser degree) without breaking compatibility, I'm now more inclined to believe that such a move isnt really necessary. Theres a real chicken and egg problem here - there's plenty that you can do with Vista that you can't do on XP, but it isnt being done because devs don't want to break compatibility with XP. Apple with their smaller userbase can get away with something like that much easier.

The problem with windows is that it's a tangled mess of code built up by thousands of people over decades. They've been doing a lot of work to detangle and componentize it without breaking compatibility - when you can load only whats needed and not have to load everything and the kitchen sink by default because otherwise it breaks, performance gets a lot better - this is essentially how theyre going to try to get W7 on netbooks.

If windows was sufficiently componentized, legacy would be much less of an issue. And as PCs get faster, that legacy becomes much less of a drag. Vista uses quite a bit more memory than XP, but when I've got 4GB of memory, that doesnt really bother me all too much.

I'd say rather than go and dump their old OS, they need to promote more effectively those apps and hardware that takes advantage of their new OS. They should have a Windows 7 app store akin to the iPhone app store. Although its an analogy thats slightly off because there isnt any legacy in the iPhone, if they were to create an easy to find central place where only the apps that take full advantage of the new APIs are found, and are easy to buy, I'd expect the number of apps that take advantage of them will skyrocket.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: TheStu
Competition pushes everyone along. The browser space has become interesting again, what with an actual emphasis on performance and compliance instead of plugins and tabs.

Both Microsoft and Apple are working on their next OSes with a larger focus on speed and reliability, but I think Apple has a bit of a headstart when you consider that the OS is, arguably, more stable to begin with, and they have a much, much smaller install base to worry about.

What I really wish Microsoft would do is just abandon Windows. Start fresh, and come out with a completely new codebase. Make sure everyone is clear that this is a new OS, that your older software will not work with it. To make transistion easier, something akin to Classic on OS X could be implemented, where it emulates the old OS within the new one. Then, after enough revisions (the problem here being Microsoft's slower compared to the competition development cycle) you just phase out Classic. (Which was in OS 10.0-10.4[PPC], once the Intel Macs came out, Classic was removed from Intel 10.4 and is not available at all in 10.5)

Actually, from what I have read and understand from reading Mary Jo Foley's blog at ZDNet, is Microsoft is actually working a completely new OS to replace Windows with. From what she says from her sources inside Microsoft, it will be at least five years before this new platform sees light and even then Windows will continue to be developed along side it for a number of years. This is pretty much the same thing Microsoft did with both the 9x and NT code bases for a number of years.

I will look up the link to the blog posting later when I get back from walking the dog. Jack Russell Terriers are demanding little shits.

I think you are talking about Midori. Which is a constantly evolving OS that they use to test out new things and see what can be implemented. At any given time, they could, with a few years polish, ship and sell Midori and it would probably be quite good. But since it is a testing ground OS I have no idea if it will ever happen.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: TheStu
I think you are talking about Midori. Which is a constantly evolving OS that they use to test out new things and see what can be implemented. At any given time, they could, with a few years polish, ship and sell Midori and it would probably be quite good. But since it is a testing ground OS I have no idea if it will ever happen.

You are correct on it being Midori. Mary Jo seems to think from what her sources say that Midori is the future Microsoft operating system. I think eventually we will see something new come out of Midori, even if it continues to be the testing ground operating system it currently is.

Edit: Added links so those reading these comments on Midori can get a little more information on what this project is.

More tech details emerge on Microsoft?s ?Midori?

Why you?ll have a long wait for Microsoft?s next OS

 

[dennilfloss]

Another review with some videoclips.

http://www.neowin.net/news/liv...ucing-the-windows-7-ui

More screenshots.

http://www.activewin.com/screenshots/windows7/

The taskbar has a bit too much of a KDE feel for me but I'm sure I could customize it to my liking.

 

[n7]

I'm excited.

As a happy user of Vista for nearly 2 years now, i'll be jumping ship to 7 as soon as i can.

I like a bunch of the new features, & the fact the driver model, etc. is still based around Vista will compability a far smaller issue than is was going from XP to Vista.

Can't wait TBH.

 

[gizbug]

Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

How different is it from vista? I was considering installing it to give it a try, but I'm thinking of waiting a few until the proper beta with the new taskbar comes out. It doesnt really feel like windows 7 without it now.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

Interesting ,I also heard SP2 installed in Vista will make it snappier too,I can't wait to see how they both pan out,I really want my Windows 8 .

I'm looking forward to new horizons and hopefully less FUD.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

MS forgot the bloat this time to slow it down?

 

[XBoxLPU]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

MS forgot the bloat this time to slow it down?

http://www.dailytech.com/Windo...ealed/article13309.htm


"As to those hoping for a lighter build, it looks like your dreams may come true. Windows 7 Chief Steve Sinofsky held up his "personal" laptop during the demo. It was running Windows 7 flawlessly on a 1 GHz processor netbook (probably using a VIA processor) with only 1 GB of RAM. It was running very smoothly, with over half the RAM free to use."

 

[gizbug]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

MS forgot the bloat this time to slow it down?

Yes , not much bloat. Just feels a lot more responsive than vista does.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: XBoxLPU
"As to those hoping for a lighter build, it looks like your dreams may come true. Windows 7 Chief Steve Sinofsky held up his "personal" laptop during the demo. It was running Windows 7 flawlessly on a 1 GHz processor netbook (probably using a VIA processor) with only 1 GB of RAM. It was running very smoothly, with over half the RAM free to use."

It was a 1 Gig Atom processor.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Why can't they make the touch screen capabilities smoother? That's embarrassing.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Why can't they make the touch screen capabilities smoother? That's embarrassing.

Well, it hasn't even hit beta yet. And from what I have seen, full blow OSes are seldom good with finger touch. Stylus is one thing since that would only hit a couple of pixels, but your finger is not a point contact, but rather an area contact on the screen. So a mouse/stylus pixel precise paradigm does not work with finger based touch.

That was why Apple heavily altered OS X to get Touch OS. OS X as it is right now, is just not quite ready for finger touch, though apparently it isn't too bad on a ModBook

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: gizbug

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: gizbug
Build 6801 is running very snappy on my laptop.
Definitely a lot quicker than vista 32 did.

MS forgot the bloat this time to slow it down?

Yes , not much bloat. Just feels a lot more responsive than vista does.

I installed it on my laptop as well. It is indeed more responsive than vista. And mind you, this is an old 1.3ghz celeron with radeon 9000 graphics that cant even handle Aero.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

You're all criminals and I'm calling the cops!

...

...

6801 works well on my desktop, too.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

Man am I jonesing for Build 6933.